Intentional Torts

Question 0

The “act” requirement for intentional tort liability refers to a _________ __________ on the defendant’s part.

Answer 0

volitional movement

Question 1

Prima Facie cases for intentional tort liability generally require the plaintiff to prove…?

Answer 1

(i) Act by defendant
(ii) Intent
(iii) Causation

Question 2

Specific Intent

Answer 2

An actor “intends” the consequences of his conduct if his purpose in acting is to bring about these consequences.

Question 3

General Intent

Answer 3

An actor “intends” the consequences of his conduct if he knows with substantial certainty that these consequences will result.

Question 4

Rule for Transferred Intent

Answer 4

The intent to commit a tort against one person is transferred to the other tort or to the injured person, such as when the defendant intends to commit a tort against one person but instead (i) commits a different tort against that person, (ii) commits the same tort as intended but against a different person, or (iii) commits a different tort against a different person.

Question 5

Limitations on the Use of Transferred Intent

Answer 5

Tort intended and tort that results are among the following:

a) Assault
b) Battery
c) False Imprisonment
d) Trespass to land
e) Trespass to chattels

Question 6

Elements of Battery

Answer 6

1. intentional (desire/purpose or substantial certainty [if I throw a rock in a crowd, I’m certain someone’ll get hit])
2. contact that’s
3. harmful/offensive (being either physical person or dignity)
4. unconsented
5. unprivileged

Question 7

Battery protects two discrete interests:

Answer 7

(1) the interest in physical integrity, i.e. freedom from harmful contacts
(2) a dignitary interest, i.e. freedom from offensive bodily contact

Question 8

Assault protects against:

Answer 8

(a) Threats of harmful or offensive contact

(b) Threats of false imprisonment

Question 9

Punitive damages may be recovered where…

Answer 9

…defendant acted with malice.

Question 10

Elements of Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress

Answer 10

(1) intentional or reckless
(2) extreme or outrageous conduct (beyond the bounds of common decency) which
(3) causes *severe emotional distress (physical manifestation unnecessary, psychiatric witness probably)
* Severe emotional distress can be proven by insanely extreme conduct (such as leaving a dead dog on someone’s porch)

Question 11

Elements of Assault

Answer 11

(1) intentional (desire/purpose or substantial certainty) act that causes
(2) imminent apprehension of
(3) harmful/offensive (being either physical person or dignity) contact that is
(4) unconsented
(5) unprivileged

Question 12

Elements of False Imprisonment

Answer 12

(1) a willful detention
(2) performed without consent
(3) without the authority of the law

Question 13

Dual Intent Rule

Answer 13

Must prove both the intent to perform the action and the intent for the resulting harm that arises from the action

Question 14

In a workplace order, to establish “intent” in an intentional tort committed by an employer against his employee, the following THREE elements must be demonstrated:

Answer 14

(1) knowledge by the employer of the existence of a dangerous process, procedure, instrumentality or condition within its business operation;
(2) knowledge by the employer that if the employee is subjected by his employment to such dangerous process, procedure, instrumentality or condition, then harm to the employee will be a substantial certainty and not just a high risk; and
(3) that the employer, under such circumstances, and with such knowledge, did act to require the employee to continue to perform the dangerous task.

Question 15

Minority rule of intent:

Answer 15

It only needs to be a voluntary movement, meaning act alone is sufficient.

Question 16

The parameters for “detention” in False Imprisonment are:

Answer 16

(1) Kept from leaving (not entering) a bounded area by actual or apparent barriers
(2) No REASONABLE means of escape (does not require heroism, embarrassment, discomfort)
(3) Must be aware of the confinement, or possibly (such as in Cal.) unaware and still suffer harm as a result of false imprisonment

Question 17

For intentional infliction of emotional distress, these elements help in determining whether certain conduct is extreme and outrageous:

Answer 17

a. the relationship between the parties
b. the susceptibility of the plaintiff to emotional distress
c. the abuse of a position of power
d. the extreme and outrageous character of the conduct is, itself, possibly used to evidence that severe emotional distress existed.

Question 18

What counts as “apparent” barriers in false imprisonment?

Answer 18

1. The victim must believe they can’t leave
2. Words alone count (such as a threat)
3. Force or threat of IMMEDIATE harm against the victim, victim’s family, or property counts

Question 19

Three ways to satisfy the “intent” requirement in False Imprisonment:

Answer 19

1. Purpose or desire to cause confinement
2. Substantial certainty
3. Transferred intent

Question 20

Two forms of consent:

Answer 20

1. Expressed

2. Implied

Question 21

The ways one can vitiate consent:

Answer 21

1. Exceeding Consent
2. Fraud
3. Mistake
4. Duress

Question 22

Exceeding Consent

Answer 22

The act goes beyond the original consent

Question 23

Consent is ineffective if…

Answer 23

…the defendant knows or has reason to know the person lacks the capacity to consent to the conduct.

Question 24

To constitute a consent, assent must be…

Answer 24

…to the invasion itself and not merely to the act which causes it. See Restatement, Torts 53.

Question 25

The 2 aspects to the effectiveness of consent:

Answer 25

1. Abnormality on the part of the alleged victim

2. Knowledge on the part of the alleged attacker

Question 26

In a fight, when does the law NOT impose a duty to retreat often required in self-defense?

Answer 26

When a person who is (1) free from fault and bringing on a difficulty is (2) attacked in his home.

Question 27

If a person voluntarily (aggressively and willingly) enters into a fight, he cannot invoke the doctrine of self-defense unless he…

Answer 27

(1) first abandons the fight,
(2) withdraws from it, and
(3) gives notice to his adversary that he has done so; or
(4) is defending against deadly force despite “intentionally invade[ing] any of another’s interests of personality….” Restatement (Second) of Torts § 71(c) cmt. d.

Question 28

The majority rule for defense of others requires that…

Answer 28

…the person one is defending must also have the privilege of self-defense.

Question 29

Elements of Self-Defense

Answer 29

1. Actual or apparent necessity
2. Defendant believes necessary
3. Other concerns
   a. reasonable force
   b. retreat rules
   c. verbal provocation
   d. excessive force

Question 30

Elements for Defense of Others

Answer 30

1. Actual necessity vs. Apparent necessity

2. Reasonable force

Question 31

Public Necessity privileges one to…

Answer 31

…damage private property to protect a public good (complete defense), such as shooting a rabid dog.

Question 32

Private Necessity privileges one to…

Answer 32

…damage private property which is less valuable than one’s own property to save one’s own property (incomplete defense), but will entail compensating for damages.

Question 33

Defenses to Intentional Torts

Answer 33

1. Consent
2. Self-Defense
3. Defense of Others
4. Defense of Property
5. Necessity

Question 34

The right to confine a person is privileged under under these conditions:

Answer 34

1. there is evidence of danger of immanent injury/harm
2. the confinement lasts only as long as is necessary to get the person to the proper authorities.
3. the actor must use the least restrictive means of preventing the apprehended harm

Question 35

Transferred Intent

Answer 35

If an act is done with the intention of inflicting upon another an offensive but not a harmful bodily contact, or of putting another in apprehension of either a harmful or offensive bodily contact, and such act causes a bodily contact to the other, the actor is liable to the other for a battery although the act was not done with the intention of bringing about the resulting bodily harm. If an act is done with the intention of affecting a third person in the manner stated above, but causes a harmful bodily contact to another, the actor is liable to such other as fully as though he intended so to affect him.

Question 36

Shopkeeper’s Privilege

Answer 36

When a person reasonably believes that another has stolen or is attempting to steal property, that person as legal justification to detain the other in a reasonable manner and for a reasonable time to investigate ownership of the property.

Question 37

Objective & Subjective Standards in Self-Defense

Answer 37

(A) Objectively, would a reasonable person would respond this way?
(B) Subjectively, could the plaintiff have reasonably believed he was in danger?

Question 38

Ways consent can be implied by law:

Answer 38

a. An emergency situation for treatment

b. Failing to object in court waives the right

Question 39

What constitutes “offensive” contact?

Answer 39

The requirement that the contact “offen[d] a reasonable sense of personal dignity” (Restatement (Second) of Torts § 19) allows actors to make contacts with others that the ordinary person will not find offensive, without fear of a suit for battery.

Question 40

In some jurisdictions, self-defense requires…

Answer 40

…no reasonable means of retreat. Restatement (Second) of Torts § 65(3).

Question 42

Apparent Necessity in Self-Defense of Others

Answer 42

Minority rule that the intervenor is authorized to act on his reasonable perception in order to defend a third party.

Question 42

Emergency Action without Consent

Answer 42

Restatement (Second) of Torts, §892D:
Conduct that injures another does not make the actor liable to the other, even though the other has not consented to it
(a) an emergency makes it necessary or apparently necessary, in order to prevent harm to the other, to act before there is opportunity to obtain consent from the other or one empowered to consent for him, and
(b) the actor has no reason to believe that the other, if he had the opportunity to consent, would decline.

Question 43

Actual Necessity in Self-Defense of Others

Answer 43

Majority rule that the intervenor is authorized to act in order to defend a third party only when that party also has the privilege of self-defense.

Question 44

Common Law of Bystander Claims

Answer 44

A person other than the intended target of Δ’s behavior may only recover if the person is (1) present at the time of the conduct and was (2) either (a) a member of the target’s immediate family or (b) suffered bodily injury.