I. INTENTIONAL HARMS TO PERSONS & PROPERTY
A. Introduction
1. Definition of Intent: Desiring or seeking a certain result, or with knowledge that it is substantially certain that the event will occur. (Versus in Negligence it doesn’t matter what you intent, just what is foreseeable).
2. Definition of Tort: A civil wrong, other than a B/K, for which the law provides a remedy
3. Don’t forget CAUSATION
4. P can only recover if the D intentionally invaded the specific interest that is protected by the tort.
B. Battery- Intentional infliction of unconsented bodily contact which is harmful or offensive.
1. Intend Contact
a) Definition of intent: desiring or seeking a certain result (Ghassemieh- Girl wanted to teacher to fall to the floor), or with knowledge that it is substantially certain that the event will occur. (Garratt- when the defendant moved the chair, did he know it was substantially certain that the woman would sit it in the spot she thought the chair was located? If so, then he did intend contact.) For children, page 16 “The only circumstance where age is of any consequence is determining what he knew- to determine that you consider his experience, capacity, and understanding. (see also, page 18, definition of intent.)
b) Contact does NOT have to be touching. It can be something that sets in motion events that “contact” the person of the other party. (Ghassemieh- Girl pulls chair out from under teacher: Fisher v Carrousel Motor Hotel- Man snatched the plate out of P’s hands ruled a battery= “actual physical contact is not necessary to constitute battery so long as there is contact with clothing or an object closely identified with the body)
c) Do not need to intend HARM, just contact (Ghassemieh- Girl intended teacher would fall, but didn’t intend to harm her, still ruled a battery)
d) Essentially- to batter someone you have to intend the contact, in addition some places you need to also appreciate that the contact is harmful and offensive.
e) Horseplay, pranks or jokes, can be a battery regardless of whether the intention was to harm.
f) Transferred Intent: (1) If D intended another tort like assault, but touching occurs, then he is liable for battery. (2) D’s intent toward one person t
ne within Fixed Boundaries
a) If a P consents to the confinement, it is NOT false imprisonment.
b) The size of the room, or the boundaries used for confinement are irrelevant for bringing the claim, but factor into the amount of damages awarded.
2. ê’s Conduct directly or indirectly Results in Confinement
a) A reasonable means of escape defeats the confinement.
b) Time of confinement & size of place are irrelevant: Any confinement allows a claim for FI. Key= longer confinement and smaller place result in larger damages.
c) Herbst v Wuennenberg- Appellate court says that there was not enough evidence to prove this element & the question should not have gone to the jury.
d) D must have apparent intention or ability to apply force to keep you confined.
3. P’s knowledge of confinement
P must attempt to ascertain whether or not he has an actual belief that he is confined.
