Torts Outline

Torts Outline
Battery:
Definition: Battery occurs when the defendant’s acts intentionally cause harmful or offensive contact with the victim’s person.
Intent:
To cause offensive or harmful contact, or
Cohen v. Smith
facts: Pla. was a patient at hospital where Def. worked. Pla. required C-section. Pla. informed hospital that religious beliefs precluded her being seen unclothed by a male. Def. allegedly observed and touched Pla.
rule: An act that may not be considered offensive by the majority may still be so considered when the act “offends a reasonable sense of dignity.”
To cause apprehension of such contact.
Even trivial offensive contact can constitute a battery.
Van Camp v. McAfoos
Facts: Def. rode his trike into Pla. who was walking down a public sidewalk. Pla. suffered injury to the Achilles tendon of her right leg, which subsequently required surgery
Rule: There is no tort independent of fault.
defendant need not herself actually contact the victim, can be indirect.
Intended person or another person suffers such a contact as a result.
Garratt v. Dailey, 279 P.2d 1091(Wash. 1955).
Facts: Def moved a chair. Pla fell and was injured.
Rule: Without Def. acting with substantially certain knowledge that said action would expose Pla to harm, there would be nothing wrongful about Def’s act, and therefore, no liability.
Special Rules:
Doctrine of Transferred Intent: intent need not be directed at P (P must suffer the resultant contact).
intent can be transferred between five torts (battery, assault, false imprisonment, trespass to chattel, and trespass to land) and different victims within these five torts.
Ex: if A intends to assault B, but accidentally commits battery against B or another party C, A is liable for the battery.
Intent:
Can be had by mentally incompetent person or a child.
Polmatier v. Russ
Facts: Δ visited the home of π and her husband Arthur, his in-laws. He had his 2 month old daughter with him. During the evening, π’s son noticed a disturbance where he saw Δ beating Arthur on the head with a beer bottle.
rule: An insane person may have an intent to invade the interests of another, even though his reasons and motives for forming that intention may be entirely irrational.
Cannot be reflexive or involuntary.
Good intentions, lack of actual harm, and beneficial results are not a defense if a reasonable sense of personal dignity would be offended. (i.e.: motives are irrelevant)
? if contact that was known to be offensive to a person with an abnormally heightened sensitivity would qualify as battery.
Nature of Act:
Must be affirmative rather than an omissions (blocking door).
May be indirect.
Nature of the Contact:
Criteria is that of an act that would be offensive to a reasonable sense of personal dignity.
P need not be aware of contact (unlike assault!)
Need not be with person of P but simply with something intimately, closely or customarily is associated w/ P’s person. (vague rule)
Assault:
Definition: Assault occurs when the defendant’s acts intentionally cause the victim’s reasonable apprehension of immediate harmful or offensive contact. The Restatement, unlike many courts, deletes the requirement that apprehension be “reasonable”.
Intent:
intend to put a person in apprehension of imminent harmful or offensive contact
Apprehension: The victim must perceive that harmful or offensive contact is about to happen to him.
Another person is put in apprehension that such contact will occur imminently.
Imminent doesn’t have to mean immediate but it does imply “no significant delay”
The defendant must desire or be substantially certain that her action will cause the apprehension of immediate harmful or offensive contact. The transferred intent doctrine is applicable to assault.
Special Rules:
Doctrine of Transferred Intent: intent need not be directed at P (P must feel apprehension for himself).
Nature of Threat:
Must be imminent
Must be aware of threat
Threat that can be avoided by agreeing to an unlawful act is assault.
An assault made conditional on the victim’s noncompliance with an unlawful demand still constitutes an assault, even if the victim is confident no assault will actually occur if the victim complies with the unlawful request.
Fear not required! Only apprehension. (May n