Torts Outline
Rostron Fall 2010
Intentional Torts
I. Battery: Intent that there be a harmful or offensive contact with another person
A. Intent: Purpose or desire (subjective) AND knowledge of a substantial certainty
B. Objective Standard of Harmful or Offensive
1. Snyder: Doctor grabbed nurse – Caused offensive contact regardless of intent à Intent was in causing contact. Objective as to what a reasonable person would find harmful or offensive.
2. Cohen: Male nurse against religion à even trivial contact can be offensive
C. Transferred Intent
1. Stoshak: Teacher breaking up fight à Person to person Transferred intent. Punch missed and hit him. “Intent follows with the punch”
2. EXTENDED LIABILITY: An intentional tortfeasor is liable for ALL damage caused by his act, not just what was intended or was reasonably foreseeable.
3. Tort to tort transfer of intent: “meant to commit an assault, instead committed a battery.” à Liable for the tort actually caused, not necessarily the one intended
D. Dual Intent v. General Intent
1. Dual Intent: Intent to cause contact AND that contact intended to be harmful or offensive, Mullins v. Parkview Hospital
2. General Intent: Simply that the contact was intended (Utah Law)
E. Knowledge of a Substantial Certainty
1. Garret: Kid pulls chair à Either knew or should have known that act would cause the harmful contact (Contact with the ground).
2. Age is a factor, but not dispositive (Must have purpose or desire) à Van Kamp: Not willing to assign fault to a child of tender years.
3. White: Nursing home punch à Mental Capacity is also a factor, but not a defense in Wagner (Utah rejection of dual intent).
II. Assault: Intent to put a person in Apprehension of Imminent Harmful or Offensive Contact.
A. Cullison: “Jump Astraddle” à Any act of such a nature as to excite an apprehension of a battery may constitute an assault.
1. That apprehension MUST be one that would normally be aroused in the mind of a Reasonable Person. (Objective Standard)
2. Imminent does not mean immediate, but must be soon
III. Trespass to Chattel: Intentionally and without justification or consent physically interfere with another person’s use and enjoyment of personal property
A: Only liable if:
1. The act results in harm to the owner’s valuable interest in the chattel, OR
2. If the owner is deprived of use of the chattel for a significant period of time
3. Kuperwicz: ∆ caused the school districts email to be flooded with porn… Held that this qualified as trespass to chattel because the action was intentional and it caused harm to the school’s computer system.
IV. Trespass to Land: Intended entry or intended remaining on the real property of another.
A: Entry is deliberate, but does not necessarily have to be malicious
1. Skydiver misses his target and lands in a neighboring field… guilty of trespass to land.
2. Throw a shoe at a noisy cat… it misses and lands in neighbor’s yard… Committed the act (Defenses include Private
the time
4. WOULD extend to “wife who witnesses her husband’s murder, but NOT if he gets shot and she learns of it five minutes later.
C: GTE: Boss is a Dick to employees over a long period of time
VII. The issue of Consent as a Defense
A: Robbins v. Harris (female inmates) – Consent is not a defense for sexual misconduct
B: Ascraft: Blood transfusion – No consent because ∏ specified family donor. Hospital ignored this, and the result was a transfusion with HIV infected blood
C: Kennedy v. Parrot: Appendectomy – Doc cut ovarian cysts causing complications à Surgeons should not shirk duties for fear of lawsuits. The law favors self-reliant doctors
D: Consent is invalid IF
1. ∏’s ability to understand decide is substantially impaired and ∆ should know that
2. Consent based on MATERIAL mistake is invalid IF
a. ∆ induced the mistake by fraud of misrepresentation OR
b. ∆ knew or should have known about the mistake
3. Doctors can impute consent in an emergency
4. Material v. Collateral mistake (Boxer in the ring)
a. Material mistake – Boxer offers to pay you to spar, but is using crazy gloves
b. Collateral mistake – Boxer simply does not pay (does not invalidate the consent)
