Intentional Torts Flashcards
Trespass to land
In order to establish a prima facie case for trespass to land, there must be: (i) an act of physical invasion of plaintiff’s real property by defendant; (ii) intent on defendant’s part to bring about a physical invasion of plaintiff’s real property; and (iii) causation.
Trespass includes the surface, the area below, and the air above the land.
A trespass claim occurs even if notice was given of the intrusion before it occurred and even if the additional support was reasonable, it is still a trespass into the neighboring property.
Battery and intent
Battery is a general intent crime. For a battery claim, the PL does not need to show that the DF intended to cause harm, but rather, offensive or harmful contact. The DF had the requisite intent if he merely knew with substantial certainty that his actions would likely bring about the consequences, He did not have to intend any injuries or intend to cause harm to trespassers.
Larceny: Does a party have to leave the premises?
The defendant does not need to leave the premises to commit larceny; taking the purse and concealing it with the intent to deprive the owner is sufficient.
Is a factual impossibility a defense to larceny?
Factual impossibility, where the substantive crime is incapable of completion because of a fact unknown to the defendant, is not a valid defense.
Burglary, as defined by the statute provided in this question, is defined as “entering a building unlawfully with the intent to commit a crime.”
Analysis
The defendant, in this case, entered the museum, with the intent to steal, and took the photocopy of the etching from its display case and concealed it. Because all of the elements of larceny are met, the defendant is guilty of larceny. The fact that the defendant did not know the etching was a copy does not negate his guilt for the crime of larceny. The defendant committed larceny and because factual impossibility does not negate the defendant’s intent to commit the crime.
Further, as noted above, factual impossibility does not negate the defendant’s intent to commit the crime.
What must apply to the document in a forgery case?
The document must have legal significance.
What must apply to the document in a forgery case?
The document must have legal significance.
Whether self defense can be used in a transferred intent case?
Yes. If the DF is defending himself he may use the self defense.
What are the requirements for trespass to chattels?
Trespass to chattels occurs when a defendant intentionally interferes with the plaintiff’s use or possession of a “chattel” (i.e., a piece of personal property, such as a car or a piece of jewelry). If a defendant thus takes the chattel out of the plaintiff’s possession, a trespass to chattel has occurred. It is unnecessary for the defendant to have intended to cause harm to the property interest. He must merely intend to do an act that ends up causing an interference.
Most courts hold that trespass to chattels only occurs where the plaintiff can prove some actual harm. Where the defendant merely makes contact with the chattel, without taking the chattel out of the plaintiff’s possession, the defendant is liable only where some harm to the chattel, or some interference with the plaintiff’s use and enjoyment of the chattel, occurs.
A is correct. A trespass to chattels claim requires that, where the defendant merely made contact with the chattel, the plaintiff must show actual harm to or deprivation of the use of the chattel for a substantial time. Here, the child’s acts caused emotional distress to the man, but the acts did not result in any actual harm to the man’s material interest in the dog.
B is incorrect. This answer reaches the correct answer with the wrong reasoning. Even a small child can commit an intentional tort, such as trespass to chattels, so long as the child is old enough to form an intent to touch. But trespass to chattels requires that the plaintiff show actual harm to or deprivation of the use of the chattel for a substantial time. Here, the child’s acts caused emotional distress to the man, but the acts did not result in harm to the man’s material interest in the dog.
C is incorrect. Even though the child touched the dog without the man’s consent, he will not have a trespass to chattels claim because mere touching, without a showing of any actual harm or a substantial interference with interest in the chattel, is insufficient to sustain such a claim.
D is incorrect. The man’s extreme distress is not enough to sustain a trespass to chattels claim against the child, which requires a showing of actual harm or such a substantial interference with the man’s property interest, neither of which occurred here.
What is conversion and the damage value for conversion?
Conversion occurs when the defendant’s trespass on the plaintiff’s property interest is substantial and amounts to an act of ownership/dominion. The remedy for conversion is always the fair market value of the property at the time of conversion.
