Torts Outiline
INTENTIONAL TORTS
I. Battery (Restatement second of Torts § 13)
An actor A is subject to liability to the other person P for battery if
A acts
intending to cause
harmful contact with P;
i. any physical impairment of condition of another’s body, physical pain or illness
contact with P this is offensive; or
apprehensive of harmful or offensive contact; and
A acts causes such contact
An actor A is subject to liability to the other person P for battery if :
A acts
Rule: ∏ must satisfy this requirement by showing that the ∆ committed a voluntary act
i. Ex. if someone picked u up and threw u at another person the law would not treat you as committing a tort
RST 2nd § 14 b-a muscular movements w/c is purey reflexive or the convulsive moments of an epileptic are not acts in the sense the RST uses the word.
i. movements of the body while sleep or while the will is in abeyance are not acts
i. waters v. Blackshear- the court held that the intentional placing of the firecracker and the intentional lighting of the firecracker brought about the harm that the ∆ intended and was enuf to suffice the act requirement.
ii. Polmater v. Russ- the ∆ must intend the act that produced the injury
RST §2 : an external manifestation of the actor’s will is necessary to constitute an act.
i. Polmater- RST 2nd §895 comment c-the court held that a rational choice to act is not required since an insane person may have an intent to invade the interests of another
1. HYPO: if the a is an insane person who thinks he is napoleon Bonaparte and his nurse who confines him to the bed is an agent of the Duke of Wellington. He breaks a leg off a chair and attacks her…HE IS LIABLE FOR BATTERY.
intending to cause contact
RST Torts § 8A- can satisfy the intent requirement if you can show that actor (1) desires to cause consequences of his act, (desire needs not be specific desire) or (2) was substantially certain that such contact would occur.
i. intent is not limited to only those consequences which are desired
ii. if the actor knows that those consequences are certain or substantially certain to result from his act and still goes ahead, he is treated as if he desired to produce that result.
iii. it is not essential that the precise injury cause be the one intended only requires that the actor intends CONDUCT THAT IS HARMFUL OR OFFENSIVE.
Rule: the act must be intended to cause, an unpermitted contact.
i. Waters v. Blackshear-it doesn’t matter that the ∆ didn’t intend to cause the injuries sustained or that he may not have understood the seriousness of his conduct and all the harm that may come of it. So long as he intended to cause unpermitted contact..
ii. Polmater v. Russ- the court held that under RST § 895 J it is not necessary for the ∆’s reasons and motives for forming the intention to be RATIONAL in order for him to have the INTENT to invade the interest of another. He SAID he intended to punish and to kill him.
i
to the ∆ than to ∏ as the innocent victim.
Injury/harm-
i. Injury denotes the invasion of a legally protected interest of another
ii. Harm RST 2nd §7 denotes the existence of loss or detriment in fact of any kind to a person.
contact with P this is offensive; or
Rule: courts have found offensive to mean disagreeable or nauseating or painful because of outrage to taste and sensibilities or affronting insultingness.
RST 2nd § 19: a bodily contact is offensive if it offends a reasonable sense of dignity.
i. OBJECTIVE TEST: It must be one w/c would offend the ordinary person and as such one not unduly sensitive as to his personal dignity.
ii. Must be contact unwarranted by the social urges prevalent at the TIME and PLACE at which it is inflicted.
1. Leitchman v. WLW Jacor communication- found offensive contact when the ∆ intentionally blew smoke in the ∏’s face and this is offensive to anyone who had a disagreeable reaction to smoke as she did.
Andrews v. Peters- the court found offensive contact when ∆ intented to tap the ∏ and although the contact was not harmful in and of itself it qualifies as an offensive contact b/c THE SOCIAL SETTING (WORK) PROVIDE CERTAIN IMPLICATIONS FOR BEHAVIOR.
