Torts Outline

TORTS I-BROWN-BARBOUR (FALL 2017)

INTENTIONAL TORTS

Elements of an Intentional Tort- To establish a prima facie case for an intentional tort, there must be an act, an intent, and causation.

ACT is a volitional movement, or voluntary movement, external manifestation of will.

INTENT

Specific Intent is when one desires the consequences of his actions, or acts for the purpose of causing the resulting harm.
General Intent is when one knows (or has knowledge) with substantial certainty that a certain result will occur; and
Transferred Intent is a doctrine that applies to establish intent when an actor attempts to commit one of the five original write of trespass torts (battery, assault, false imprisonment, trespass to land , and trespass to chattels, and accomplishes any one of these five.

commits a different tort against that person,
commits the same tort as intended but against a different person, or property
commits a different tort against a different person. In such cases, the intent to commit a tort against one person is transferred to the other tort or to the injured person for purposes of establishing a prima facie case.

Public Policy

Law wants to limit antisocial behavior and wants people to bring disputes to court, rather than taking the law into their own hands. Law holds you responsible for result of you actions even if it didn’t come out like you intended.

CAUSATION the act directly or indirectly resulted in the plaintiff’s injury.

MOTIVE IRRELEVANT

Even though defendant acts without a hostile motive or desire to do any harm, or even where he is seeking to aid the plaintiff, he may be liable.

Motive impels a person to act to achieve a result. Intent denotes the purpose to use a particular means to effect that result.

5 MAIN RULES

Age does NOT Negate Intent

Children 5 years and older are responsible for their actions and their age does not negate intent. Children younger than 5 are too young to formulate intent.

Good Faith Mistake does NOT Negate Intent

Acting in good faith or a mistake does not negate intent

Public Policy

Act with more care even if you act in good faith
State of mind; lying as a defense (“But it was an accident!” Who can really know someone’s internal thoughts when they acted?

Insanity and Mental Illness does NOT Negate Intent

Fault is not necessary for liability; Mentally ill and insane have to has to entertain the same intent as a normal person; Specific intent is not needed, simple show that the mentally ill person acted voluntarily.

Public Policy

Courts make caretakers/family members responsible to encourage them to provide better supervision /control.
If the mentally ill person can afford the help/care, then he should be able to afford the damages he causes to victim.
The civil courts do not want to have to debate the mental capacities of the mentally ill person.
An insane person who has abundant wealth shouldn’t be able to continue in unimpaired enjoyment of the comfort his money brings to him while his victim bears the burden of his actions unaided.

Voluntary Intoxication does NOT Negate Intent

Intent is not negated if one is voluntarily intoxicated. However, involuntary intoxication is a defense.

Accident

No liability if the actions are beyond one’s control where one did not act intentionally; however liability for negligence is possible.

Public Policy

Accidents can and do occur and we need to give some absolution to the defendant.

BATTERY RULE

Battery is an act with intent to cause a harmful or offensive bodily contact to another person and such contact results, or act with intent to cause apprehension of an imminent harmful or offensive contact and such contact results.

Interest Protected-protects one’s bodily integrity and personal dignity.

PRIMA FACIE CASE

Act is a volitional movement, or voluntary movement, external manifestation of will to cause harmful or offensive contact or cause apprehension of an imminent harmful or offensive contact.

Intent

Specific Intent is when one desires the consequences of his actions, or acts for the purpose of causing cause harmful or offensive contact or cause apprehension of an imminent harmful or offensive contact
General Intent is when one knows (or has knowledge) with substantial certainty that a certain result will occur;
Transferred Intent is established when a defendant acting with the intent to commits one of the other four trespasses of writ torts but instead commits a battery.

Causation is established by showing that the defendant’s act directly or indirectly resulted in the plaintiff’s injury.

CONTACT is touching the person or anything intimately connected to the person.

HARMFUL CONTACT is a physical injury

OFFENSIVE CONTACT is an affront or insult to one’s dignity based on an object standard of reasonableness.

REASONABLENESS STANDARD In determining whether a particular contact is “offensive,” the standard is not whether the particular plaintiff was offended, but whether an ordinary person who is not unduly sensitive about his dignity would have been offended.

APPREHENSION is established by showing that the plaintiff was aware or conscious of the imminent harmful or offensive contact.

IMMINENT means immediate, unless action is taken to avoid or evade harmful or offensive contact.

INDIRECT CONTACT

Contact may be satisfied by touching something so intimately connected to the person so as to be deemed part of that person.
It may be done through an agent, through oneself, or something one is holding; and extension of oneself.

AWARENESS IS NOT REQUIRED

Defendant is still liable if plaintiff is not aware at the time that the harmful or offensive contact occurred (Sleeping Beauty)

CROWDED WORLD THEORY (POSSNER)

In a crowded world, a certain amount of personal contact is inevitable and must be accepted. Absent expression to the contrary, consent is assumed to all those ordinary contacts which are customary and reasonably necessary to the common intercourse of life.

BODILY HARM IS NOT REQUIRED

It is not required that harmful or offensive contact results in bodily harm (any physical impairment of the condition of another’s body, or physical pain or illness).

DAMAGES- NOT REQUIRED

1. ACTUAL- proven loss or injury; damages that repay actual loss

2. NOMINAL-sum awarded when legal injury is suffered but not substantial loss or injury to be compensated.

3. PUNITIVE-damages awarded to punish the defendant when he acted outrageous with recklessness or malice

DEFENSES

Consent
Self-Defense
Defense of Others
Defense of Property

ASSAULT

Assault is an act with intent to cause apprehension of an imminent harmful or offensive contact that results in such apprehension.

PRIMA FACIE CASE

Act is a volitional movement, or voluntary movement, external manifestation of will to cause apprehension of an imminent harmful or offensive contact.

Intent

Specific Intent is when one desires the consequences of his actions, or acts for the purpose of causing apprehension of an imminent harmful or offensive contact.
General Intent is when one knows (or has knowledge) with substantial certainty that such apprehension will result.
Transferred Intent is established when a defendant acting with the intent to commit one of the other four writ of trespass torts, but instead commits an assault.

Causation is established by showing that the defendant’s act directly or indirectly resulted in the plaintiff’s apprehension.

CONTACT is touching the person or anything intimately connected to the person.

HARMFUL CONTACT is a physical injury

OFFENSIVE CONTACT is an affront or insult to one’s dignity based on an object standard of reasonableness.

REASONABLENESS STANDARD The apprehension of harmful or offensive contact must be such that a reasonable person of average sensitivity would think that the contact is harmful or offensive.

If a person has known sensitivities and the defendant is aware, and acts with intent, he is liable for assault.

APPREHENSION is established by showing that the plaintiff was aware or conscious that act may result imminent harmful or offensive contact.

AWARENESS REQUIRED

Apprehension cannot occur without awareness. P must be aware of the threatened contact.

FEAR NOT NECESSARY

Fear can help prove apprehension, but you don’t have to have fear for apprehension to occur. One may reasonably apprehend an immediate contact although he believes he can defend himself or otherwise avoid it

IMMINENT means immediate, unless action is taken to avoid or evade harmful or offensive contact.

NO HOSTILITY NEEDED

It is not necessary that D bear malice towards P, or intend to harm her.

WORDS ALONE NOT SUFFICIENT

Ordinarily, words alone are not sufficient, by themselves, to give rise to an assault. Normally there must be some overt act – a physical act or gesture by D – before P can claim to have been assaulted.

Special circumstances: However, the surrounding circumstances, or D’s past acts, may occasionally make it reasonab