Torts Outline

INTENTIONAL TORTS

I. Battery

a. Intent—only need to intend the act, do not need to intend consequences, e.g. injury. Good intentions irrelevant.

i. Purpose

ii. Knowledge with substantial certainty

1. Garratt v. Daley- 5 year pulled chair out under his aunt. He knew she would hit the ground, did not know that she would get hurt, was liable.

2. Age is relevant

b. Harmful or Offensive Contact

i. Harmful – altering a structure or function of the body

ii. Offensive- would offend a reasonable person’s sense of personal dignity.

c. No consent

Vosberg v. Putney- ct. found defendant liable for battery when defendant purposely kicked plaintiff in classroom.

Eggshell Skull Rule- Take plaintiff as they are…liable for all damages, even if they are not intended.

II. Assault-

a. Intent

b. Apprehension of imminent contact

i. Must be present apparent ability to make contact

ii. Some courts have held that apprehension must be reasonable

iii. the Restatement say it only matter that this plaintiff apprehended contact.

iv. 3rd view (prosser’s) must prove apprehension was reasonable except when plaintiff is unusually sensitive and defendant knew of sensitivity.

v. Threats of future harm insufficient (b/c they are not imminent), as well as threats to call legal authority and economic ones

c. No consent

d. Gesture – in most cases required (classic exception, stand and deliver in highway robbery, words are enough. Some other cases words could be harsh enough that no gesture is required).

III. Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress — Outrage

a. Elements

i. Intent/ reckless

ii. Extreme and outrageous

iii. Causal

iv. Severe emotional distress

b. Two exceptions

i. Common Carriers and Innkeepers – Courts impose a stricter standard b/c they were formed in a monopoly, no choice to use another business. Higher standard for company, lower standard of proof for plaintiff

1. So “extreme and outrageous” is lowered to “grossly insulting” for trains, airlines, buses, FedEx, etc.

ii. Known sensitivity

c. Bystander seeking damages for outrage

i. Defendant must intentionally/ recklessly cause emotional distress to a third party

1. Only if, the person is an immediate family member whether or not distress results in bodily harm

2. Any other person, present at the time, with distress resulting in bodily harm.

IV. False Imprisonment

a. Intent

b. Confinement with in fixed boundaries

i. Must be no apparent reasonable exit

1. Reasonable exit is not one which would impose a risk of harm to the plaintiff or to their property or would otherwise offend reasonable sense of dignity

ii. Does not need to be a specific amount of time

c. Unjustified force, threat of force, or legal authority

d. No consent

e. Aware of confinement or Harmful

V. Trespass to Land

a. Intent

b. Presence –

i. Do not need to be owner, just the possessor. So could be renter of an apartment, etc.

c. Consent not part of plaintiff’s prima facie case, but consent is the burden of defendant to prove. (Only the case w/ trespass to land)

VI. Trespass to Chattel

a. Intent

b. Minor Interference – must show one of three

i. Dispossession

ii. Deprived of use for substantial amount of time

iii. Damage

c. No Consent

d. Damages are assessed at value of the actual loss—can’t collect emotional damages.

VII. Conversion

a. Intent

b. Major interference – also must show one of above three

i. Factors in determining if it is Major interference

1. The extent and duration of the actor’s exercise of dominion and control

2. Actor’s intent to assert a right in fact inconsistent with the other’s right of control

3. The actor’s good faith

4. The extent and duration of the resulting interference with the other’s right of control.

5. The hard done to the chattel

6. The inconvenience and expense caused to the other.

c. No consent

d. Damages assessed at the full value of the chattel.

i. There is the option to instead of the full value to seek replevin, demanding chattel be returned

VIII. Tranferred Intent- can only be applied to 5 torts derived from the original writ of trespass.

a. Five torts derived from Writ of Trespass are:

i. Battery

ii. Assault

iii. False imprisonment

iv. Trespass to land

v. Trespass to chattels

b. The original act must be a tortious one in order for transferred intent to apply.

c. Two types of transferred intent

i. Intending one tort and committing another

ii. Intend the tort to a one person and end up committing it to another

CONSENT

I. Actual

a. Sometimes called “consent in fact”

b. Where plaintiff is actually willing that the conduct (but not necessarily the consequences) occur.

II. Apparent

a. Where the plaintiff’s conduct reasonably leads another to believe that the plaintiff has consented, even though they did not actually consent.

III. Implied

a. A legal fiction used in the absence of consent to justify desirable conduct which would otherwise be tortious.

b. Consent is implied b/c the interests to be furthered by invasion (e.g. preservation of life or limb) are more important than those which will be sacrificed (e/g/ personal bodily integrity and freedom from unconsented contact).

IV. Whenever there is actual consent (or expressed non-consent), it trumps both apparent and implied.

V. Consent based on a mistake

a. Two questions to decide if consent is valid when there is a mistake

i. Is the mistake sufficiently ma