1. Read very carefully.
2. Assume all issues, defenses, counter-defenses are there. Find them!
Use the facts for each argument. Don’t be conclusory
Argue Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress on every intentional tort.
Cohen v. Petty: defendant driving a car suddenly felt sick and the car crashed hurting the passenger.
Rule: He had not reason to anticipate his illness so not liable.
Spano v. Perini: blasted nearby property causing damage.
Strict liability for blasting since he knows it will likely cause harm to neighboring property
Intent- defendant desires result or knows to a substantial certainty that it will occur.
Desire it to happen OR
Know to Substantial certainty that it will occur (garret v. dailey)
Transferred Intent- If A tries to hit B but hits C instead then A is liable for the battery.
Intentional Tort General
The Mistake Doctrine- It is no defense that the defendant makes a mistakes even he reasonably believes there is a privilege.
Ranson v. Kitner: A shoots B’s dog believing it is a wolf:
liable because he intended to kill it.
Insanity and Infancy- insanity and infancy are not defenses to intentional torts:
Mcguire v. Almy: P tried to prevent insane D from injuring herself. D hurts P. D is still liable even though she is insane.
a one year old pulls a trigger of a gun. did not intend to hurt but intended to pull the trigger so liable
Respondeat Superior
An employer is liable for the tortuous acts of his or her employees which are committed within the scope of employment and which cause injuries or property damage to a third person.
Defense: Not within scope of employment
Battery- Battery occurs when the defendant’s acts intentionally cause harmful or offensive contact with the victim’s person. (reasonableness not a factor)
Intent Requirement
Cole v. Turner: touching in anger is battery
even if no physical harm was intended still liable for harm caused if the intent will invade another in a way the law forbids.
Garret v. Dailey: 5 year old pulled chair from victim while attempting to sit down.
He did not have any willful intention to make her fall but intention was the physics of the act. knew that she will sit down.
Harmful Contact: Something that causes a bruise
Consent not a defense. A contracts HIV from B even
t is the case either that: (1) Assailants intended to cause a harmful or offensive bodily contact; or (2) Assailants intended to cause an imminent apprehension on Saxon’s part of a harmful or offensive bodily contact. In this example the assailants gave Saxon a forceful blow to his head.
Battery will most likely be found.
Is the restaurant owner liable for battery against Abel?
Rule: Battery occurs when the defendant’s acts intentionally cause harmful or offensive contact with the victim.
When showing intent it is not necessary that the restaurant owner desired to physically harm Abel. Pierre with have the necessary intent for battery if he knew to a substantial certainty that there would be either harmful or offensive contact. By moving a person that just jumped out of a burning building it is likely that he would be injured from the fall. Pierre should know to a substantial certainty that he would committing harmful contact. Battery will most likely be found.
