Intentional Torts to the Person

Question 1

Battery - Key Elements

Answer 1

• harmful or offensive contact
• such contact must be with the plaintiff’s person
• still requires intent and causation (this is required for all intentional torts)

Question 2

Battery - Harmful or Offensive Conduct

Answer 2

• harmful if causes actual injury, pain or disfigurement
• offensive if would be considered offensive to a reasonable person
  -> only if not permitted or consented to (implied for certain ordinary contacts involved in everyday life)

Question 3

Battery - Direct vs Indirect Contact

Answer 3

• can be either
• ex: setting a trap for pl to fall into can count as indirect contact

Question 4

Battery - Plaintiff’s Person

Answer 4

• includes anything connected to pl (ex: clothing or purse)

Question 5

Battery - Damages

Answer 5

• pl DOESN’T need to prove actual damages -> can still recover nominal damages even if actual damages not proved
• may also recover punitive damages for malicious conduct

Question 6

Assault - Key Elements

Answer 6

• act by def creating reasonable apprehension in pl
• of an immediate battery (harmful or offensive contact to the person)
  -> note the requirement of immediacy
• still includes intent + causation too

Question 7

Assault - Apprehension

Answer 7

• needs to be reasonable -> courts won’t protect pl against exaggerated fears of contact
• DON’T need fear/intimidation -> apprehension = more along the lines of anticipation/expectation

Question 8

Assault - Knowledge

Answer 8

• to establish apprehension, pl needs to have been AWARE of the threat (ex: if somebody fake punches your face while you’re sleeping, it’s not an assault because you didn’t know it was happening)
• doesn’t need to have been aware of def’s identity though

Question 9

Assault - Apparent Ability

Answer 9

• if def has apparent ability to commit a battery, that might be enough to cause a reasonable apprehension

Question 10

Assault - Effect of Words

Answer 10

• usually not enough -> typically need to be coupled with conduct to count as battery
• keep in mind extent to which this is in keeping with immediacy (if someone says they will do something, the threat doesn’t feel as immediate)
• BUT words CAN negate reasonable apprehension (seems to be a words speak louder than actions kind of thing)

Question 11

Assault - Damages

Answer 11

• similar to battery
• actual damages NOT required -> can get nominal damages w/o them
• malicious conduct may get you punitive damages

Question 12

False Imprisonment - Key Elements

Answer 12

• an act or omission on the part of the defendant that confines or restrains the plaintiff
• pl must be confined to a bounded area
• intent + causation too

Question 13

False Imprisonment - Sufficient Acts of Restraint

Answer 13

Include:
- physical barriers
- physical force directed against pl, immediate family, or personal property
- direct threats of force
- indirect or implied threats of force
- failure to release pl when under legal duty to do so
- invalid use of legal authority

Question 14

False Imprisonment - Insufficient Acts of Restraint

Answer 14

Include:
- moral pressure
- future threats

Question 15

False Imprisonment - Timing + Awareness

Answer 15

• timing is IRRELEVANT -> can be super short confinement + still qualify
• awareness IS required though -> must know of the confinement or be harmed by it

Question 16

False Imprisonment - Bounded Area

Answer 16

• freedom of movement must be limited in all directions for an area to be bounded
• must be no reasonable means of escape known to pl

Question 17

False Imprisonment - Damages

Answer 17

• similar to battery and assault
• DON’T need actual damages -> can recover nominal damages
• punitive damages if def aced maliciously

Question 18

Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress - Key Elements

Answer 18

• an act by def amounting to extreme + outrageous conduct
• pl must suffer severe emotional distress
• intent + causation too
• book refers to this tort as a “fallback tort position” -> says to pick another tort if there’s a different one that will allow pl to recover

Question 19

IIED - Extreme and Outrageous Conduct

Answer 19

• conduct that transcends all boundaries of decency

Conduct not normally outrageous may become so if:
- continuous in nature
- committed by a certain type of def (common carriers or innkeepers may be liable even for mere gross insults) OR
- directed toward a certain type of pl (children, elderly, pregnant people, supersensitive adults if the sensitivity is known to def)
-

Question 20

IIED - Intent

Answer 20

• recklessness as to effect of def’s conduct will satisfy intent req
  -> note that this is different from other intentional torts (usually DOESN’T suffice)

Question 21

IIED - Damages

Answer 21

• actual damages ARE required here (unlike the other intentional torts to the person noted)
  -> b/c need to establish severe emotional distress
• proof of physical injury generally not required
• sliding scale - the more outrageous he conduct, the less proof of damages is required

Question 22

IIED- Causation in Bystander Cases

Answer 22

• when def’s conduct is directed at a third person, + pl suffers severe emotional distress b/c of it, pl may recover by showing either the prima facie case elements of emotional distress OR that:
  1) they were present when the injury occurred
  2) the distress resulted in bodily harm or pl is a close relative of he third person AND
  3) def knew these facts