Intentional Torts Flashcards
1) Battery
a) Elements: defendant acts with intent to cause a harmful or offensive contact (or imminent apprehension of such contact) and a harmful or offensive contact directly or indirectly results.
i) An act is a voluntary movement (e.g., not striking someone while having a seizure).
ii) Intent means it is the defendant’s goal to cause the injury or the defendant knows with substantial certainty that injury will result.
(1) Note: a mere “high likelihood” is not enough to satisfy the requisite intent requirement.
iii) A few notes on a harmful or offensive contact (or imminent apprehension of such contact):
(1) Offensiveness is judged by a reasonable person standard.
(2) Ignore extreme sensibilities (unless intent is present—e.g., defendant knew of them)
(a) Ex.: Sarah hates it when people touch her, even in social situations. If Chris taps her on the shoulder to get her attention, he will not be liable for battery because he did not have intent to
cause an offensive contact. However, if he knows that she hates it when people touch her and he taps her on the shoulder with intent to cause the offensive contact, he will be liable.
(b) Ex.: Chris spits on Sarah. He will be liable for battery since that is offensive judged by ordinary standards.
(3) Beware of the situations where the defendant is only trying to cause “imminent apprehension” but ends up causing a harmful or offensive contact.
(a) Ex.: Rick jokingly fake punches Andrea in order to scare her. Rick accidently makes contact with her. Thus, he has committed a battery.
iv) The contact can occur with the plaintiff herself or anything connected to the plaintiff—e.g., a necklace, purse, something the plaintiff is carrying, etc.
v) A harmful or offensive contact must directly or indirectly result.
(1) Actual damages are not required. The plaintiff can recover nominal damages even if he suffered no severe actual damage.
(2) The contact need not be “direct.”
(a) Ex.: Defendant mails the plaintiff an envelope that contains bacterium that causes anthrax, with the intent for the plaintiff to contract anthrax. The plaintiff opens it and contracts anthrax. The defendant has committed a battery.
b) Note: incompetency is no defense unless it negates one of the elements of the battery.
i) Ex.: Lawrence is mentally ill and mistakes Bob for an evil dictator. When Lawrence sees him walking down the street, Lawrence punches him in the face. Lawrence will be liable for battery. However, if Lawrence thinks Bob is a punching bag, he will not be liable.
2) Assault
a) Elements: Defendant acts with intent to cause a harmful or offensive contact (or imminent apprehension of such contact) and an imminent apprehension directly or indirectly results.
(Note: these are the same as battery, except the harm that results is an “imminent apprehension.”)
i) The defendant must act. This means that there needs to be conduct—a gesture, no matter how small—e.g., balling hands into a fist. Mere words are not enough!
ii) The defendant must have the intent to cause a harmful or offensive contact or imminent apprehension of contact. This means:
(1) The defendant has an intent to commit an assault or a battery or to put the plaintiff in imminent apprehension of contact.
(2) Future threats (“I will beat you up tomorrow”) are not “imminent” enough.
iii) “Apprehension” must occur. Apprehension does not mean fear. It is knowledge or anticipation of impending contact.
(1) There is no apprehension if plaintiff does not know about the impending contact.
(2) Actual damages are not required. Plaintiff can recover nominal damages
3) False imprisonment
a) Elements: the defendant acts with the intent to confine or restrain the plaintiff to a bounded area, actual confinement occurs, and the plaintiff knows of the confinement or is hurt by it.
i) Actual confinement can occur through physical barriers, physical force directed at plaintiff or a member of his family, etc. (However, future threats do not suffice. There must be an immediate threat.) “Actual confinement” means that there is no reasonable means to escape.
Plaintiff is considered to be actually confined if the escape route is:
(a) dangerous (e.g., jumping out of a window),
(b) embarrassing (e.g., taking someone’s clothes while they are in the shower), or
(c) hidden to plaintiff and not reasonably discoverable (e.g., a secret passageway).
ii) The plaintiff must know of the confinement or be hurt by the confinement.
(1) If the plaintiff knows of the confinement, then that is the harm that he recovers for.
(a) The period of time that the plaintiff is confined is immaterial to whether false imprisonment has actually occurred (but the period of time will affect damages).
(2) If the plaintiff does not know of the confinement, he cannot recover unless he was
hurt in some way.
(a) Ex.: Plaintiff is locked in a room by the defendant but does not realize it. The plaintiff is not harmed in any way. The plaintiff cannot recover any damages even if he later discovers that he was locked in the room.
(b) Ex.: Plaintiff is locked in a room by the defendant but does not realize it. The plaintiff decides to take a nap. A fire is somehow started. Firefighters cannot get to the plaintiff because the door is locked. The plaintiff is injured as a result. The plaintiff may recover damages. (Plaintiff could also recover if he knew of the confinement while it occurred, even if he was not injured.)
(c) Ex.: A carnival employee stopped a Ferris wheel for 30 minutes without any reason. The employee likely committed false imprisonment.
b) Note: merchant’s privilege
i) A merchant has a privilege to detain a shoplifter (and will not be liable for false imprisonment) if the merchant has a reasonable belief as to theft and detains the shopper in a reasonable manner for a reasonable time.
4) Intentional infliction of emotional distress
a) Elements:
i) defendant intentionally or recklessly
ii) engages in extreme or outrageous conduct, which causes
iii) severe emotional distress.
(1) Look for conduct that is repetitive or transcends all social norms.
(2) Generally, insulting language is not enough.
(a) Exception: If the defendant is an innkeeper or common carrier at the time they engage in the conduct, this will suffice.
(3) Plaintiff’s extreme sensibilities (e.g., phobias) only matter if defendant knows about them.
(4) Physical injuries are not necessary.
b) Limited fact pattern: If the defendant intends to cause physical harm to a close relative of the plaintiff when the plaintiff is present and defendant knows that both are present and knows of the close relationship, the defendant may be liable for this tort. The third party does not have to be a relative if plaintiff suffers physical symptoms or if defendant’s purpose
was to cause plaintiff physical distress.
5) Trespass to land
a) Elements: the defendant physically invades the land of another and intends to be where he is.
i) Physical invasion occurs when the defendant:
(1) intentionally enters the property of another;
(2) puts tangible objects on the property of another;
(3) invades the space within a reasonable distance above or below another’s property (digging a tunnel underneath or throwing something over their property, but not, for example, flying a plane high above the property);
(4) remains on the plaintiff’s land after an otherwise lawful right of entry has lapsed; or
(5) knows that land entry was virtually certain to result from his or her action.
ii) Physical invasion is not an intangible force (loud music, lights, gas, etc.—that is a nuisance!).
iii) Defendant must have the requisite intent.
(1) Defendant does not have to know that the property belongs to another. He can think it is his and still be liable for trespass.
(2) Defendant needs intent—that is, a voluntary act.
(a) Ex.: Intent is missing if the defendant trips and falls on his neighbor’s land. Intent is not missing if the defendant intentionally walks onto his neighbor’s property, even if he thinks it is his own.
6) Trespass to chattels
a) Definition: intentional interference with personal property of another and harm results.
i) Intentional interference means the intent to do the act of interference.
(1) Intent is not present if property is negligently damaged.
(2) The belief that the property is one’s own property is no defense.
ii) Personal property is something tangible. It is not real property or intangible property (like an e-mail list).
b) Damages: the damages that the plaintiff recovers are the cost to repair the property.
c) Examples of trespass to chattels include vandalism or withholding plaintiff’s property for a short period of time.
7) Conversion
a) Definition: intentional interference with personal property of another and serious and substantial harm results.
b) This is very similar to trespass to chattels but the degree of harm is different.
c) Examples of conversion include theft (e.g., stealing a car), total destruction of the property, refusing to give property back, reselling property to a third person, or withholding property for a substantial period of time.
i) Ex.: Patty is at a party at her sister’s house. On her way out, she accidentally knocks over her Neighbor Nancy’s vase, which shatters into pieces. This is not conversion because there was no intentional
interference. However, if Patty knocked over the vase out of anger, she would be liable for conversion.
d) Damages: damages are the full market value, which is calculated at the time and place of the conversion.
8) Note on the transferred intent doctrine
a) This doctrine applies when the defendant intends to commit a tort against one person but instead either (a) commits a different tort against that person, (b) commits the tort he intended against a different person, or (c) commits a different tort against a different person.
Intent is transferred. This applies to assault, battery, false imprisonment, trespass to land, and trespass to chattels.
