Torts
McGarity
Fall 2014
Intentional Torts
BATTERY
§ 13. Battery (Harmful Contact)
An actor is subject to liability for battery if
A) He acts intending to cause a harmful or offensive contact with the person of the other or a third person, or an imminent apprehension of such contact, and
B) A Harmful Contact with the person of the other directly or indirectly results
§ 18. Battery (Offensive Contact)
An actor is subject to liability for battery if:
A) He acts intending to cause a harmful or offensive contact with the person of the other or a third person, or an imminent apprehension of such contact, and
B) A Offensive Contact with the person of the other directly or indirectly results
Ransom v. Kitner (Shooting dog mistook for Wolf)
Mistakes, even if made in good faith, do not negate liability for battery
META LEVEL PURPOSE:
Harmful: Protect bodily integrity of people from invasion
Offensive: Protect mental tranquility
§ 19
Test for offensiveness is an objective one: Based on reasonable sense of personal dignity
UNLESS: Person is aware of other’s peculiar sensibilities
Acceptability of conduct set by prior interactions between two people
Substantial Certainty
Garrat v. Dailey (5 year old moving chair)
Ambiguity whether contact must be substantially certain or the harmful or offensive nature needs to be substantially certain
Spivey v. Battaglia (Hug caused severe damage)
Negligence vs. Battery
– Contact was intended but there could be no substantial uncertainty of its harmful result
– Court: It was battery
Liability of the Insane
McGuire v. Almy (Nurse Caretaker injured by insane patient’s outburst)
Insane persons can be held liable for most intentional torts
Purpose:
DETERENCE: Encourage caretakers to avoid harming others
CORRECTIVE JUSTICE: Innocent injured P should not be barred from recovering for damages
Transferred Intent
Talmage v. Smith (Kids on shed, hit other kid in eye with stick)
Intent to unlawfully batter one person transfers if accidentally harms another.
BATTERY, ASSAULT, FALSE IMPRISONMENT
Extended Battery
Fisher v. Carrousel Motor Hotel, Inc. (Racist steals plate at buffet)
Extends to items intimately associated with person,
Purpose: Protect Dignitary interest
Crowded World
Least touching in anger constitutes battery but incidental touches would not be a battery. Cole v. Turner
Touching must be in rude, insolent, or angry manner.
People living in crowded world have to accept some contact, consent assumed to ordinary touching of life
O
indirectly results in such confinement
3. Confined person is aware (at the time ) or is harmed by it
Confinement
Confinement must be complete, no reasonable means of egress
§ 36, Comment a
Means of egress is unreasonable if it involves exposure (nudity of person), material harm to clothing, or danger of substantial harm to another
Individual can be confined by words they fear to disregard. See Hardy v. LaBelle’s (Employee accused of shoplifting)
Individual can be confined by IMMEDIATE threats to
A) Plaintiff’s person
B) Plaintiff’s property (more valuable property is more persuasive)
C) Third (present) Party
If there are alternative means of egress then Defendant has duty to inform Plaintiff of those means if he cuts off all known means of egress to the plaintiff Talcott v. National Exhibition CO. (person locked inside stadium without being informed of other means)
Consent as a Defense
Plaintiff need not resist imprisonment, just demonstrate lack of consent.
Hardy v. LaBelle’s (Plaintiff agreed to stay and made no suggestion she wished to leave)
