Legal Skills Saturday #2

Question 1

Garratt v. Dailey

46 Wn.2d 197, 279 P.2d 1091, 1955 Wash . LEXIS 458

Answer 1

Rule

(1) When a minor has committed a tort with force, he is liable to be proceeded against as any other person would be through his guardian ad-litem.
(2) To prove battery, there needs to be substantial certainty. A minor maybe liable for an intentional tort, depending on their experience, capacity, & understanding to possess the knowledge of substantial certainty that their act would be harmful or offensive.

Question 2

Wagner v. Utah Department of Human Servs.

2005 UT 54, 122 P.3d 599 (Sup.Ct.)

Answer 2

Rule

The intent element of battery only requires the intent to bring the offensive bodily contact.

Question 3

Ranson v. Kitner

31 Ill. App. 241 (1888)

Answer 3

Rule

Even if acting in good faith, a party may be held liable for damages resulting from her mistake.

Question 4

McGuire v. Almy

297 Mass. 323, 8 N.E.2d 760 (1937)

Answer 4

Rule
Where a legally insane person causes intentional damage to the person or property of another, he is liable for that damage in the same circumstances in which a normal person would be liable.

Question 5

Talmage v. Smith

101 Mich. 370, 59 N.W. 656 (1894)

Answer 5

Rule
A party is liable for damages to another if he intends to use unreasonable force to inflict harm upon another and accidentally harms another party whom he did not intend to use force against.

Question 6

Cole v. Turner

[1704] 6 Mod Rep 149

Answer 6

Rule

Even the slightest touching of another out of anger constitutes a battery.

Question 7

Wallace v. Rosen

765 N.E.2d 192 (Ind. Ct. App. 2002)

Answer 7

Rule
In a battery claim, the touching must be offensive to an ordinary person’s sense of dignity who is not duly sensitive under the circumstances.

Question 8

Fisher v. Carrousel Motor Hotel, Inc.

424 S.W.2d 627, 1967 Tex. LEXIS 267, 11 Tex. Sup. J. 143

Answer 8

Rule
The meaning of person in battery is not limited to the body but extends to the clothing, an object held, or anything closely identified with the body.

Question 9

I de S et ux v. W de S
At the Assizes
1348 [or 1349] Year Book, Liber Assisarum, folio 99, placitum 60

Answer 9

Rule

Assault may be found and damages awarded in the absence of physical contact.

Question 10

Western Union Tel. Co. v. Hill

25 Ala. App. 540, 150 So. 709, 1933 Ala. App. LEXIS 171

Answer 10

Rule
An assault is an intentional act to cause the victim reasonable apprehension of immediate harmful or offensive contact that is supported by a belief that offending party can actually effectuate the act.

Question 11

Big Town Nursing Home, Inc. v. Newman

461 S.W.2d 195 (Tex. Civ. App. 1970)

Answer 11

Rule
False imprisonment is the direct restraint by one person of the physical liberty of another without adequate legal justification.

Question 12

Parvi v. Kingston

41 N.Y.2d 553, 394 N.Y.S.2d 161, 362 N.E.2d 960 (1977)

Answer 12

Rule

A person must have conscious knowledge of the unlawful confinement at the time of the false imprisonment.

Question 13

Hardy v. La Belle’s Distrib. Co.

203 Mont. 263, 661 P.2d 35 (1983)

Answer 13

Rule
In order to hold a party liable for false imprisonment, a party must prove he was unlawfully restrained against his will.

Question 14

Enright v. Groves

39 Colo. App. 39, 560 P.2d 851 (1977)

Answer 14

Rule
False imprisonment occurs when an individual is taken into custody by another who claims but does not have proper legal authority.

Question 15

Whittaker v. Sanford

110 Me. 77

Answer 15

Rule

Insufficient forms of escape from confinement is a basis for false imprisonment.

Question 16

State Rubbish Collectors Asso. v. Siliznoff

38 Cal. 2d 330, 240 P.2d 282 (1952)

Answer 16

Rule
A party is liable for damages for intentionally subjecting another to mental distress even without intending to cause bodily harm if the harm that result is foreseeable.

Question 17

Slocum v. Food Fair Stores, In

Answer 17

Rule
Words alone are not enough: A party is not liable for intentional infliction of emotional distress for simple insults not intended to have real meaning or serious effect that subsequently causes another emotional distress.

Question 18

Harris v. Jones

281 Md. 560, 380 A.2d 611 (1977)

Answer 18

Rule
In order for a party to recover for intentional infliction of emotional distress a party must suffer a severely disabling emotional response to another’s conduct.

Question 19

Taylor v. Vallelunga

171 Cal. App. 2d 107, 339 P.2d 910 (1959)

Answer 19

Rule
A third-party may also recover under the tort of IIED when 1) she is a close relative of the primary victim whom suffered IIED; (2) present at the scene of the outrageous conduct against the primary victim; and (3) the defendant knows the close relative is present.