intentional torts & defenses Flashcards
intentional torts
battery, assault, false imprisonment, IIED, trespass to land, trespass to chattel, conversion
defenses to intentional torts
consent, defense of self, defense of others, defense of property, necessity
intentional torts - intent
A person intends the consequence of her action if:
- It was her purpose to bring about the consequence OR
- She knows to a degree of substantial certainty that the result will occur.
intentional torts - transferred intent
Intent can transfer from intended victim to actual victim or intended tort to actual tort.
battery
If he intends to cause 1) a harmful or offensive contact 2) w/plaintiff’s person.
Offensive = unpermitted
Anything connected w/plaintiff suffices for plaintiff’s person.
assault
If he intends to cause 1) reasonable apprehension 2) of an immediate contact.
Apparent ability creates reasonable apprehension.
Words are not enough for immediacy. Words coupled with conduct can be enough. Words can undo any reasonable apprehension.
false imprisonment
If he intends to confine with a 1) sufficient act of restraint 2) to a bounded area.
false imprisonment - sufficient act of restraint
- Threats are enough.
- Inaction is enough if there is an understanding that D could act for Ps benefit.
- P generally must be aware of the confinement.
- Confinement’s length of time is irrelevant.
false imprisonment - bounded area
- Freedom of movement is restricted.
- Mere inconvenience is not enough.
- Not bounded if there is a REASONABLE means of escape of which P is aware.
intentional infliction of emotional distress (IIED)
Fallback position to use only when other tort theories aren’t working!
Extreme and outrageous conduct that exceeds the bounds of common decency that is intended or substantially certain to cause severe emotional distress.
(Outrageous conduct with damages)
IIED - outrageous conduct
- Continuous conduct, extreme and outrageous conduct that exceeds the bounds of common decency
- Type of plaintiff (elevated status) - children, elderly, pregnant women - easier to characterize how they are treated as outrageous
NOT SUPERSENSTIVES ON ANY INTENTIONAL TORTS - Type of defendant (elevated status) - common carriers and innkeepers - easier to characterize their conduct as outrageous
IIED - damages
Proof of SEVERE emotional distress
IIED - intent
- Recklessness can suffice
- Substantial certainty can suffice
- Transferred intent is normally unavailable
intentional torts to property
trespass to land, trespass to chattel, conversion
trespass to land
An intentional act of physical invasion to land interfering with the right of possession.
Only intent required is intent to go in a particular direction, no need to show knowledge of crossing the property line.
Propelling a tangible, physical object will suffice.
Land includes the airspace above and the subsurface below so long as it is at a distance there the landowner can make reasonable use of the space.
nuisance
substantial and unreasonable interference w/Ps use and enjoyment of his land
Balance of utility of Ds conduct against gravity of harm to P
trespass to chattel
An intentional act of invasion to personal property interfering with the right of possession.
Interference may be an intermeddling (damaging the chattel) or a dispossession (depriving the lawful right of possession.
Remedy: Loss of use or cost to repair
conversion
An act of dominion and control over personal property intended or substantially certain to cause serious interference w/Ps right to immediate possession.
Remedy: market value at time of conversion
defenses to intentional torts - consent
- P must have capacity to consent. Those lacking capacity includes children, mentally impaired, coerced, and those under fraud or mistake.
- Can be express or implied consent. Implied consent arises through custom and usage or through P’s own conduct.
defenses to intentional torts - defense of self
A person is justified in using REASONABLE force to prevent what she REASONABLY believes to be an imminent threat of force against her.
Reasonable belief requires that a reasonable person in D’s position would have believed he was in danger.
A person may use ONLY the degree of force reasonably necessary to avoid the threatened harm.
Deadly force is only reasonable when the defender believes that she is facing a threat of deadly force.
Courts are divided on the whether a retreat is required before deadly force may be used.
Modern trend required retreat before using deadly force unless you are in your own home.
defenses to intentional torts - defense of others
A person may defend another person 1) in the same manner and 2) under the same conditions as the person attacked would be entitled to defend himself.
A defender is not liable if he reasonably believes that another person was endangered.
defenses to intentional torts - defense of property
A person may use reasonable force to defend his real or personal property. HOWEVER, deadly force may NEVER be used to protect property alone.
Hot pursuit - only use reasonable force to recapture your property
Shopkeeper - reasonable grounds to detain, manner of detention, length of detention
defenses to intentional torts - necessity
ONLY FOR INTENTIONAL TORTS TO PROPERTY
public necessity, private necessity
defenses to intentional torts - public necessity
complete privilege, action is justified, no compensation is required
defenses to intentional torts - private necessity
partial privilege, action is justified, compensation for actual damages is required
