TORTS CASE OUTLINE
Battery
I. Battery-elements
-Act
-that causes
-harmful/offensive contact with a person
-with intent to cause harmful/offensive contact
A. An Act-voluntary muscular contraction
Example-A sees B about to sit down and removes the chair, B falls to the ground, breaking a hip.
Example-***An act can also include words*** B asks A to take a picture of B by the Grand Canyon. A consents to take the picture, but secretly wants B to fall. A tells B to move farther back, ultimately sending B over the edge of the Canyon.
Example-****An act can be direct or indirect****A removing the chair
Before B sits down is an indirect act, but in intentional torts does not matter if the act is indirect or direct.
B. That causes-if you take an event and remove the act from the event and then the event does not take place, then it is a cause, if it does still occur, then it is not a cause.
C. Harmful contact with a person-altered your person, left a mark, hurt physically, placed an individual in substantial pain, not mental pain.
Offensive contact with a person-must be offensive to a reasonable person, plaintiff must have suffered some injury, invasion of the dignity of their person, offensive according to the standards of the community. Example-not limited to your flesh, such as the Fisher case, a plate was taken from the plaintiff.
D. With intent to cause harmful or offensive contact with a person- The individual must not only intend the act, but must act for the purpose of inflicting a harmful or offensive contact on the plaintiff, or realize that such a contact is substantially certain (if it fails to happen and it’s a huge surprise) to result.
***As long as you have purpose, intent is there, even if its unlikely to occur**
Example-A shoots arrow to see what happens and it hits someone, not a battery unless had intent to hit B, and hits B.
Example-A shoots arrow to see what happens in a crowded room, and hits C. This is a battery because A was shooting the arrow in a crowded room, and was substantially certain to hit an individual.
Ghassemieh v. Schafer
Plaintiff (a teacher) was injured when she fell to the floor while attempting to sit in a chair, after the Defendant (a 13-year old student in her class) had intentionally pulled the chair out from underneath her as a joke.
Garratt v. Dailey
Facts: liability of an infant for alleged battery. Brian Dailey, five years old, allegedly pulled chair from under Ruth Garratt, resulting in fracture of her hip.
Issue: Can Dailey be held liable for battery without proof that he had actual intent to cause harmful or offensive contact with plaintiff?
Reasoning: The absence of intent to injure, etc does not absolve from liability if there is knowledge of substantially certain contact. If the court finds that such knowledge existed, the necessary intent would be established for battery. Need to clarify information to see if knowledge existed.
Note: Upon further investigation, was shown Dailey had knowledge and ruled in favor of plaintiff.
• Not all courts woule impose battery liability upon child.
• Horton v. reaves rejected Garratt’s “infants liable for torts irrespective of intent to cause harm” in favor of “must appreciate the fact that the contact may be harmful.”
• In adult cases, even without attempt to harm, battery can occur. Alzheimer patient absolved without apprecation of conduct.
• Restatement of torts – not authoritative but influential
• Transferred intent – even if intent to commit one act, if it results in the outcome of another, there is liability
Fisher v. Carrousel Motor Hotel, Inc.
Facts: Suit for actual and exemplary damages of alleged assault and battery. approached Fisher, snatched his plate from his hand and shouted that Fisher, a “negro” cold not be served in the club. Fisher testified that he was not touched and did not testify that he suffered fear or apprehension of physical energy, but did testify that he was embarrassed and hurt
at Morgan’s car veered into her lane causing her to run into the curb and sustain injuries. Morgan purports that their car did not veer. He states he did not intend to scare or harm Vetter, but did not care how Vetter felt but was only trying to amuse his friends.
Issue: Was there evidence that Vetter was threatened and placed in apprehension of bodily harm?
Reasoning: words with other acts and circumstances can constitute assault; is sufficient to feel apprehension of immediate harm with no significant delay, not instantaneous; the ability to prevent the threatened harm by flight or self-defense does not preclude assault.
Notes: Even though Gaither was driving, Morgan could be liable for Gaither act b/c could find acted in concert.
• Like battery, assault is an intentional tort, so intent to cause must be proven.
FALSE IMPRISONMENT
-Elements:
-Act
-That causes
-Confinement
-Awareness or harm
-Intent to cause confinement
Confinement
Ways to cause confinement
1. actual or apparent physical barriers-ex. Locking someone in a closet
2. overpowering physical power-ex.A pins B down
3. threat to apply force-ex. A threatens to shoot B
4. submission to duress other than threats of physical force-ex. A threatens to shoot B’s dog
5. asserted legal authority-police officer
Intent to cause confinement
-intend the act-example-A locks B in a closet.
-knowledge with a substantial certainty that confinement will occur-the boat case-A promised B that they would dock-did not-false imprisonment-because there was no means of escape-
Herbst v. Wuennenberg