Torts against persons

Question 1

Battery Rule

Answer 1

D causes harmful or offensive contact with P’s person or something closely connected to P

Question 2

Battery intent

Answer 2

D must either:
▪ desire to cause an immediate harmful or offensive contact; or
▪ knows that such contact is substantially certain to occur.

Question 3

Battery: definition of harmful or offensive conduct

Answer 3

▪ Inflict pain or impair any function of the body.
▪ Offensive to a reasonable person.

Unoffensive = unpermitted

Doesn’t need to actually touch&raquo_space; food poisoning example

Question 4

For Battery, does p need to be aware of conduct?

Answer 4

NO (different from assault)

Question 5

Defense to Battery

Answer 5

Consent

Question 6

For Battery, does P need to prove injury?

Answer 6

No, will get compensatory damages just by showing the elements.

Question 7

Assault Rule

Answer 7

D intentionally causes P to be in reasonable apprehension of an imminent harmful or offensive contact.

Question 8

Assault intent

Answer 8

D must:
▪ act with the desire to cause an immediate harmful or offensive contact or the apprehension of such contact, or
▪ know that such a result is substantially certain to result.

Question 9

Assault: Reasonable Apprehension

Answer 9

objective standard.
▪ A reasonable person in the same position as P would have experienced the same apprehension.
▪ If the apprehension is reasonable, it doesn’t matter whether D could actually carry out the threat. For instance, brandishing an unloaded gun can still be assault.

Question 10

Assault: Imminent Battery

Answer 10

Battery must be able to occur almost instantly.
EXAMPLE: If Dracula says he will come back tomorrow to suck your blood, it is not an assault.

Question 11

Can words negate assault intent?

Answer 11

Yes - “If it weren’t a tort, I would punch you in the face.”&raquo_space; no intent

Question 12

Can words alone create an assault?

Answer 12

Rarely

Question 13

False Imprisonment Rule

Answer 13

D intentionally causes P to be confined to a bounded area against P’s will and P knows of the confinement or is injured by it.

Question 14

False Imprisonment Intent

Answer 14

 D desires to confine or restrain P in a bounded area, or
 knows that such confinement is virtually certain to result.

Question 15

False Imprisonment: Confinement in a Bounded Area

Answer 15

 Confinement can consist of: Physical barriers, threats of force, failing to release P after duty to release arises, or the invalid assertion of legal authority.

Question 16

False Imprisonment: Confinement Duration

Answer 16

 No duration requirement. A very brief confinement will suffice.

Question 17

False Imprisonment: Confinement and means of escape

Answer 17

 If P has actual knowledge of a reasonable means of escape, then there is no confinement and no liability.

Question 18

Reasonable means of escape

Answer 18

means no threat of harm to P or property. The means of escape can’t expose P to risk of embarrassment.

EXAMPLE: If there is an open window on the first floor and P knows about it, there is no confinement. If there is an open window on the third floor and P would have to jump and risk injury, this is not a reasonable means of escape.
EXAMPLE: Don takes all of Susan’s clothes and leaves her in the middle of the woods. Because Susan does not have a reasonable means of escape, Don has falsely imprisoned her.

Question 19

False Imprisonment: Against P’s Will

Answer 19

Consent is a defense.

EXAMPLE: Paul is apprehended by an undercover store detective. He is taken to a back room to wait while the detective calls the police. Paul says he will wait for the police and then threatens to sue for false imprisonment but cannot because he has consented to the confinement.

Question 20

If P is aware of confinement

Answer 20

P is entitled to any damages the jury finds appropriate.

Question 21

If P is unaware of confinement

Answer 21

P can only claim damages if injured by the confinement

Question 22

Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress (IIED) Rule

Answer 22

D engages in an intentional or reckless act amounting to extreme and outrageous conduct that causes P severe emotional distress.

Question 23

IIED - Intentional Definition

Answer 23

D acts with desire to cause severe emotional distress or knows that such severe emotional distress is virtually certain to occur.

EXAMPLE: Dora had an ongoing feud with Pamela. Dora calls Pamela, disguises her voice and says “This is General Hospital. Your child has just been rushed to the emergency room.” Pamela suffers severe emotional distress. Dora has the intent for IIED because it was her goal to cause emotional distress.

Question 24

IIED - Recklessness Definition

Answer 24

D acts in conscious disregard of a high degree of probability that emotional distress will follow.

EXAMPLE: Dora is at the hospital and walks by the check-in desk where she overhears a discussion and thinks that one of the nurses is saying that Pamela’s child has been rushed to the emergency room. Dora calls Pamela and conveys this information. This would suffice for IIED because it would be a form of recklessness.

Question 25

IIED: Extreme and Outrageous Conduct Definition

Answer 25

▪ Conduct exceeds all bounds tolerated by civilized society.

Question 26

IIED: Extreme and Outrageous Conduct - Is offensive or insulting language enough?

Answer 26

Generally, no. EXCEPT when:
● D is a common carrier/innkeeper;
● D knows of P’s particular sensitivity; or
● D is an authority figure using racial/ethnic slurs against a subordinate.

Question 27

IIED: Severe Emotional Distress

Answer 27

meaning greater than a reasonable person (objective test) would be expected to endure.
▪ Must be substantial/long lasting as opposed to trivial/transitory.

Question 28

IIED: Severe Emotional Distress - is physical injury required?

Answer 28

NO - P does not have to prove physical injury, but distress must be severe

Question 29

IIED in VA

Answer 29

VA does not favor cause of action for IIED
● For IIED claim to survive demurrer- P must allege all necessary facts and provide factual support for each element of cause of action
● cannot be used to prohibit economic damage to P’s business

Question 30

VA Crime of Computer Trespass

Answer 30

when one interferes with a CP or CP data or uses CP to cause injury to property of another
● Can recover actual damages and cost of civil suit - regardless of whether D acted w/ malicious intent

Question 31

Battery Contact Timing

Answer 31

Does not need to be instantaneous *ie. harmful pranks, food poisoning

Question 32

False Imprisonment - Omission to act?

Answer 32

Can be act of restraint IF there was a pre-existing duty to the plaintiff

e.g. cabin crew does not help physically disabled woman leave plane; paramedic fails to unlock ambulance

Question 33

Hallmarks of Outrageous Conduct

Answer 33

(1) Conduct is continuous/repetitive/happens frequently
e.g. continued harassment, debt collectors making abusive threats
Most comonly tested

(2) Common carriers/innkeepers as defendants- much more likely to treat conduct as outrageous (e.g. airlines & hotels)
»> duty to be kind towards customers. Intentional distress is outrageous
e.g. motel keeper telling person too ugly for vacant room

(3) Plaintiff is a member of a fragile class of persons
3 fragile classes:
- Children
- Elderly people
- Pregnant women- D must know woman is pregnant

(4) D’s decision to target fragile classes is outrageous

Question 34

It is always outrageous to target behavior that is…

Answer 34

a known emotional sensitivity the plaintiff suffers from

Question 35

To prove he suffered from severe emotional distress, must the plaintiff offer any particular evidence?

Answer 35

No - doesn’t need not offer any particular ev of severe distress

No need to prove lost wages, physical impact, psychiatrist, etc… all valid but not required

Could just testify in a conclusory fashion “I was severely distressed”

Question 36

On the exam, the severe emotional distress element is often…

Answer 36

negated in the fact pattern.

e.g. “p was mildly annoyed by course of conduct so they sued for intentional infliction of emotional distress”.

WATCH OUT FOR THIS