Select Page

Torts
University of Toledo School of Law
Rapp, Geoffrey C.

Torts
1)      Intentional Torts
a)      Physical Harms
i)        Trespass to Person, Land and Chattels
(1)   Vosburg v. Putney
(a)    Battery: intentional infliction of harmful bodily contact
(i)      Intent – purposefully (desires to bring about harm) or knowingly (knows harm is substantially certain to occur
(ii)    If intended act is unlawful, then intention to commit unlawful
(iii)   Liability for all consequences of intentional tort, even those resulting from unforeseen results
(2)   Dougherty v. Stepp
(a)    Trespass to Land: unauthorized entry into the close of another
(b)   Intention to perform act, not cause harm
(i)      Entry alone causes trespass
(ii)    Damages caused only change degree of harm
(iii)   D does not have to intend to trespass, only intend to perform act
(3)   Intel Corp. v. Hamidi
(a)    Trespass to chattel: intentionally dispossessing another of the chattel, or using or intermeddling with a chattel in the possession of another
(b)   Elements:
(i)      Lack of consent
(ii)    Interference with possessory interest (Hamidi caused no damages = no trespass)
(iii)   Intentionality
ii)       Defenses
(1)   Consensual
(a)    Mohr v. Williams
(i)      Evil intent not required, only intent to do act
(ii)    Any non-consensual touching can be considered battery
(b)   Canterbury v. Spence
(i)      One must receive the informed consent of another
(ii)    Physician must make all information regarding risks of procedure available to patient
(c)    Hudson v. Craft
(i)      Protection of boxers who give mutual consent to fight
(ii)    Generally, mutual consent absolves participants of liability
(iii)   However, state may protect classes of individuals who may be unable to appreciate the consequences of their consent
(2)   Insanity
(a)    McGuire v. Almy
(i)      Insane people liable when they can entertain the same intent required for a sane person to be held liable
(3)   Self-defense
(a)    Courvoisier v. Raymond
(i)      Person justified in defending himself with force
(ii)    Accidental harming of third party innocent bystander not actionable
(iii)   Who was aggressor is jury question
(4)   Defense of Property
(a)    Bird v. Holbrook
(i)      Setting spring guns wit

risonment
(1)   Bird v. Jones
(a)    Imprisonment involves more than simply not being able to go where one pleases
(b)   Imprisonment requires the restraint of another within some limits defined by an exterior power or will
(c)    A person can be imprisoned and not know it, but damages in that case would be nominal
(2)   Coblyn v. Kennedy’s Inc.
(a)    A demonstration of physical power which, to all appearances, can be only avoided by submission is false imprisonment
(b)   One can be reasonably detained (suspected shoplifter, for instance) if it is reasonably necessary for the protection of person or property
iv)     Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress
(1)   Wilkinson v. Downtown
(a)    Medical damages to a woman on whom a practical joke was made are not to remote for recovery.
(b)   Defendant need only to have intended some damage, not intend full damage caused by actions