Intentional torts Flashcards
ASSAULT
What are the 4 elements of assault?
1) INTENT
2) ACT: ACT RESULTING IN REASONABLE APPREHENSION
APPREHENSION = KNOWLEDGE of something;doesn’t need to be definitive, just reasonable and apparent
NOTE: b/c KNOWLEDGE rqd π has to have seen it coming
NOTE: You DO NOT HAVE TO HAVE FEAR to have apprehension
e. g π can see a baseball bat being swung at his head and have apprehension but not necessarily be fear fearful. BUT π could not have been asleep when this was occurring and have the bat swung but never touching him and he never knowing what occurred
3) ACT: APPREHENSION of an IMMEDIATE BATTERY (harmful/offensive contact)
NOTE: Words alone w/o action or some sort of physical gesture lack immediacy; however, words can negate OTHERWISE valid immediacy (i.e. conditional words to negate a threat OR future intent words coupled with present ability [weapon] to harm) — NOT IMMEDIATE to say I will kick your butt tomorrow
NOTE: damages are not required (π can recover nominal damages)
NOTE: UNLOADED GUN PROBLEM - If π knows that the gun is not loaded then no REASONABLE apprehension. But if π does not know one way or another then REASONABLE to be apprehensive
4) CAUSATION
BATTERY
What are the 4 elements of battery?
1) INTENT
Intent = is satisfied as long as the ∆ knew with substantial certainty that the harmful/offensive contact would take place
2) ACT: HARMFUL OROFFENSIVE contact:
HARMFUL = an injury
OFFENSIVE = violates a reasonable sense of personal dignity(i.e. a normal person would not put up w/it)
e.g. a NORMAL person would be okay if a stranger tapped them on the shoulder. A NORMAL person would not be okay w/a stranger stroking their hair.
3) ACT: CONTACT TO The π’s PERSON:
∆’s contact must be with the π’s “person”
→ “Person” includes anything that is connected to the π (ANYTHING π is HOLDING, TOUCHING, WEARING, etc)
e.g kicking a tire of a bike that π is riding, grabbing π’s purse, tapping the back of a horse that π is riding
NOTE: POISONING FOOD is battery
NOTE: There can be a lag between the action (e.g. poisoning the food) and the harmful effect (getting ill)
NOTE: damages are not required (π can recover nominal damages)
4) CAUSATION
TORTIOUS TRANSFERRED INTENT
What is tortioustransferred intent?
As long as ∆ desires to produce the legally forbidden outcome, the intent req is satisfied for an INTENTIONAL tort even if a DIFFERENT PERSON gets hurt or a DIFFERENT TORT is committed
TORTIOUS TRANSFERRED INTENT
Which 5 intentional torts are subject to transferred intent doctrine?
Transferred intent may be invokes ONLY IF the tort INTENDED and the RESULTING tort are among these...
assault
battery
false imprisonment
trespass to land
trespass to chattelsINTENT
What isintent?
A person acts intentionally when they DESIRE to PRODUCE the LEGALLY FORBIDDEN OUTCOME
e.g. Security guard locking an office door w/o realizing that there was a person inside locked the door on purpose but did not desire to lock a person in the office
Intent may EITHER be….
SPECIFIC:the goal in acting is to bring about specific consequences
General: the actor knows with “substantial certainty” that specific consequences will result
NOTE: Everyone is “capable” of forming intent … INCAPACITY IS NOT A DEFENSE (e.g. a minor can form requisite intent)
FALSE IMPRISONMENT
What are the 3 elements of false imprisonment?
1) INTENT
2) ACT: ACT OR OMISSION THAT RESTRAINS/CONFINES
SUFFICIENT RESTRAINT/CONFINEMENT =
(i) physical barriers;
(ii) physical force;
(iii) actionable threats of immediate force;
(iv) failure to release; and
(v) invalid use of legal authority
NOTE: Act of restraint only counts if π knows of it OR is harmed by it (if π is unaware AND unharmed, then there can be no tort c/a for false imprisonment)
NOTE: stay put or I will kill you counts even if person then leaves the room (words must be a threat that would act on the mind of a reasonable person)
NOTE: OMISSION counts - e.g. leaving a wheelchair bound person in their seat after the plane has landed
3)CAUSATION: π MUST BE CONFINED IN BOUNDED AREA
NOTE: An area is NOT bounded, if there is a reasonable way to escape that π can reasonably discover (If it’s disgusting, hidden, humiliating OR dangerous, then it’s NOT reasonable)
NOTE: Amt of time confined is IRRELEVANT
NOTE: damages are not required (π can recover nominal damages)
NOTE: A rat infested sewer pipe is NOT a reasonable means of escape
IIED
What are the 3 elements of intentional infliction of emotional distress (IIED)?
1) INTENT
NOTE: RECKLESS is enough to satisfy INTENT
2)ACT: ∆ must engage in OUTRAGEOUS CONDUCT
OUTRAGEOUS CONDUCT = “conduct exceeding all bounds of decency tolerated in a civilized society”
NOT outrageous = (i) mere insults, even if goal is to cause distress; (ii) ∆ exercising his 1st A. rights
3 OUTRAGEOUS FACTOR HALLMARKS =
(i) the conduct is repetitive/continuous; e.g. constant sexual propositioning; debt collection antics rising to the level of outrageous
(ii) the ∆ is a common carrier (Amtrak) or an inkeeper (hotel) can be liable for “gross insults”;
(iii) member of a certain fragile class of persons (i.e. children, elderly, known pregnant women, previous awareness of a known emotional sensitivity)
3) CAUSATION
4) DAMAGES: π must SUFFER SEVERE DISTRESS
NOTE: No specific evidence types of evidence are mandated in proving suffering and DOES NOT HAVE TO BE PHYSICAL
NOTE: π DOESN’T need to exhibit physical symptoms from the distress BUTACTUAL DAMAGES ARE NECESSARY(π CAN’T recover nominal damages)
For 3d party bystander IIED, must ALSO prove:
1) The π was present when the injury occurred
2) The π is a close relativeof the injured person; AND
3) The ∆ KNEW that the π was present AND was a close relative to the injured person
TRESPASS TO LAND
What are the 4 elements of trespass to land?
1) INTENT
Intent satisfied if trespass occurred by the deliberate entry even if ∆ does not know that entry is unauthorized
e. g. a hiker off the public path on private land
e. g. a horse w/rider charging off on its own does NOT count
2) ACT: ∆ must commit an act of PHYSICAL invasion
PHYSICAL INVASION =
(i) physical entrance onto property;
(ii) propelling/throwing/tossing something physical onto land;
(ii) BUT NOT intangible forces (light, smells, sounds, etc)
3)ACT: π must be the POSSESSOR of the real property
REAL PROPERTY = includes not only the surface BUT ALSO airspace and sub-terrain (at reasonable distances)
e.g. Neighbors baseball flying across backyard but never landing in the yard counts but plane flying overhead does not
NOTE: The cause of action belongs to person in possession, not necessarily the owner
e. g. the cause of action is the person leasing and not the lessor
4) CAUSATION
NOTE: damages are not required (π can recover nominal damages)
TRESPASS TO CHATTELS & CONVERSION
What istrespass to chattels? (versus conversion?)
1) INTENT
2) ACT: ∆ intentionally interferes with π’s right of possession in a chattel
3) CAUSATION
4) DAMAGES
Types of interference =
(i) VANDALISM: inter-meddling (directly damaging chattel); OR
(ii) THEFT/CONSUMPTION: dispossession (depriving π of lawful right to posses)
NOTE: ∆’s mistake as to ownership will not insulate from liability
NOTE:
(i) For TTC the damage remedy is the cost of repair
(i) For CONVERSION the damage remedy is the FMV of the item
re: Conversion vs. TTC
———————————————————————–
Conversion requires interference so serious that it warrants requiring ∆ to pay FULL value Factors of serious interference:
(i) the withholding pd;
(ii) the extent of the use/damage
NOTE: the damage remedy is for full mkt value (a forced sale) at the time of the CONVERSION
CONSENT: AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE TO INTENTIONAL TORT
What is VALID CONSENT to an intentional tort?
1) π must have LEGAL CAPACITY to give valid consent
e. g. a drunk person DOES NOT have legal capacity (but drunk person can still commit a tort!)
NOTE: Children can ONLY consent to things APPROPRIATE to their AGE
2) EXPRESS CONSENT= spoken/written “words” by π, giving ∆ permission to behave in a certain way
NOTE: CANNOT be obtained via:
(i) FRAUD (as to essential matter);
(ii) DURESS (threats);OR
(iii) π’s mistake (if ∆ took advantage of that
mistake)
3) IMPLIED CONSENT = TWO types…
TYPE 1: APPARENT CONSENT = consent based on ∆’s reasonable interpretation of π’s objective conduct/body language (NOTE: this applies ONLY to NORMAL contactinherent in sports, ordinary incidental contact like on a train, etc)
TYPE 2: Consent implied by law = arises when it’s necessary to save a person’s life (or other important interest in person or property)
NOTE: incapacitated individuals (incompetents; drunks; etc) are DEEMED INCAPABLE of consent; BUT children can consent to an age appropriate invasion of their person
NOTE: ALL consents have a SCOPE, and if ∆ exceeds the scope, then he will be liable for the tort
SELF DEFENSE: AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE TO INTENTIONAL TORT (PROTECTED PRIVILEGE)
When canself-defense excuse a ∆’s intentional tort?
NOTE:NY distinction
1) When a ∆ REASONABLY BELIEVES that she is being OR is about to be attacked — The threat must be IN PROGRESS OR IMMINENT→can’t use self-defense to responded to completed intentional tort (i.e. revenge)
A reasonable mistake as to the existence of the danger is allowed
Generally NOT available to initial aggressor→ NO PREEMPTIVE ACTIONS
MAY also be available if a 3rd PARTY bystander is also unintentionally injured in the course of the SELF DEFENSE
2) RULE OF SYMMETRY → ∆ permitted to have used such force as reasonably necessary to protect against injury
Can use up to deadly force if the circumstances necessitate it
NY DISTINCTION: If there is a possibility of retreat, then you CAN’T use deadly force; UNLESS…
(i) ∆ can’t retreat safely;
(ii) ∆ is in his own house;
(iii) ∆ is a police officer (or a person assisting a
police officer)
DEFENSE OF OTHERS: AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE TO INTENTIONAL TORT (PROTECTED PRIVILEGE)
When can defense of othersexcusea ∆’s intentional tort?
1) When a ∆ reasonably believes that a 3d partyis being OR is about to be attacked
The threat must be in progress or imminent →can’t use defense of others to responded to completed intentional tort (i.e. revenge)
A reasonable mistake as to the existence of the danger to 3d partyis allowed
2) When ∆ believes that the 3d party could have used force to defend himself
Can use as much force as he could have used in self-defense if he were the one threatened with injury
DEFENSE OF PROPERTY: AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE TO INTENTIONAL TORT
EXCEPTION: PRIVILEGE
When can defense of propertyexcuse toa ∆’s intentional tort?
1) One may use reasonable force (but NOT deadly force)to prevent the commission of tort against her real or personal property
E.g., Asecurity guard’s privilege to use REASONABLE force in detaining suspects or allowed to confine a suspected shoplifter (defense to false imprisonment) OR in attempting arrest (assault)
A request to desist or leave must first be made (UNLESS futile)
CANNOT use DEADLY FORCE to defend property
CANNOT SET TRAPS to defend property
The threat must be in progress (∆’s defense will be in hot pursuit) or imminent→can’t use defense of property to responded to completed intentional tort (i.e. revenge)
A reasonable mistake as to whether an interference has occurred is allowed;
NOTE: mistake is NOT ALLOWED when π’s interference is privileged (e.g. no mistakes allowed AS TO WHETHER THERE IS A NECESSITY or other privileged entry)
PRIVILEGE →PRIVATE NECESSITY: AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE TO INTENTIONAL TORT
When can PRIVATE NECESSITYexcuse ∆’s intentional tort to property (land, chattels, conversion)?
1) ONLY allowed for PROPERTY RELATED torts
2) If there is an emergency, which requires protection of∆’sprivate interest
NOTE: The ∆ IS liable for actual damages to π’s property, BUT is not liable for nominal/punitive damages
As long as the emergency continues, the ∆ CANNOT be expelled, evicted or ejected; there is a “RIGHT OF SANCTUARY”
PRIVILEGE →PUBLIC NECESSITY: AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE TO INTENTIONAL TORT
When can PUBLIC NECESSITYexcuse ∆’s intentional tort to property (land, chattels, conversion)?
1) ONLY allowed for PROPERTY RELATED torts
2) If there is an emergency, which requires protection of thecommunity as a whole or a significant group of ppl →e.g. natural disasters
3) The ∆ IS NOT liable for actual damages, nominal or punitive damages w/r/tto π’s property →public policy rationale
4) As long as the emergency continues, the ∆ CANNOT be expelled, evicted or ejected; there is a “RIGHT OF SANCTUARY”
