Select Page

University of North Carolina School of Law
Daye, Charles Edward

1.    INTENT – (premised on the intent to bring about the consequences of the act, not just harm but dignitary concerns as well), p. 17
•             1. Act must be done for the purpose of causing the contact or apprehension
OR          (disjunctive – EITHER WILL SUFFICE)
2. With knowledge that such contact is substantially certain (very grave risk is not enough) to be produced
     • Hypothetical: projectile aimed toward crowd – actor claims no intent to injure
Obviously there is no SUBSTANTIAL CERTAINTY that harm will occur. However, “for the purpose” can be upheld because an objective test discredits actor’s claim, finding no other possible intent (i.e. liars).
• Mistake does not negate intent – Ranson v. Kitner
-You can be held liable even when not morally blameworthy.
-Still responsible for mistakes. Accidents = unintentional. 
-Actor is under the onus not to make a mistake.
• Insanity NOT a defense.
1.      Capacity to form intent? (insanity could come into play here, preventing capacity)
2.      Actual intent? – if both, intent lies.
• Transferred Intent – Talmage v. Smith (transferred tort)
          Battery, Assault, False imprisonment, Trespass to land, Trespass to chattels
            Intend one and accomplish one? à liability (note 2, p. 29)
• ExtendedLiability – resulting injuries more severe than reasonable person would have anticipated à still liable,
boy kicks another in shin..infection flares up…no intent to harm à still liability (* somewhat of an exception probably, intent essential)
2.    BATTERY, p 29
Cole v. Turner
1.      The least touching of another in anger is a battery.
2.      IF narrow hallway, touching occurs without any violence or design of harm, NOT a battery.
3.      If narrow hallway, any uses violence against another, to force way in rude inordinate manner, it is a battery; or any struggle to the degree that may do hurt is a battery.
• Wallace v. Rosen (fire drill, stairway, school, broken leg, Hobson ’s choice)
Ø      “In a crowde

Initial promised conditions can play factor (Whittaker, yacht)
Ø      Circumstances play big role….swimmer? sharks? Kids on board?
Ø      Doesn’t include exclusion (no admittance, etc.)
Ø      Can be confined to a car, despite its mobility
Ø      Alternative known, reasonable exit? à no liability
• It’s a DIGNITORY TORT – grievance occurs when the dignity is harmed, which requires consciousness (it does not, however, require recollection of the harm to the dignity)
• False arrest is the act of asserting to have authority to take someone into custody – if the assertion is wrong – subcategory of False Imprisonment.
Ø       PHYSICAL RESTRAINT not necessary (Enright v. Groves) – assertion of authority (police officer, better comply – or reasonably believable authority) sufficiently credible as a restraint.
Boundary can be conceptual