Intentional Torts
What is intent?
The intent to produce a consequence from either: (1) purposely causing harmful or offensive contact; or (2) knowledge to a substantial certainty that contact will occur.
Elements in Dual Intent Jurisdiction
1. Intent to contact which may be harmful or offensive;
2. Intent to contact which actually is harmful or offensive.
Elements of Assault
1. Apprehension of Imminent Harmful or Offensive Contact (knowledge normally aroused in the mind of a reasonable person that harmful or offensive contact could potentially occur)
2. Intent to Cause Harmful or Offensive Contact (purposely causing someone to fear harmful or offensive contact will occur because of another person's actions or verbal expressions)
Self-Defense and the Defense of Others
Elements of Trespass to Land
1. Intentional entry on the land of another.
2. Property must belong to another.
3. Physical act of trespass must be committed by the defendant.
What is Purpose-Intent?
Desire to bring about a legally forbidden consequence, desire, goal, aim, objective, and purpose to accomplish something the law forbids.
Harmful
Elements of False Imprisonment
1. Intent
2. Restraint or Confinement
3. Plaintiff is Aware of Confinement
Consent
Implied or expressed permission given by an individual for the act to occur.
Elements of Trespass to Chattels
1. Dispossessing another of the chattel.
2. Using or intermeddling with a chattel in the possession or another.
What is Knowledge-Intent?
Action of knowing that a legally forbidden consequence is virtually certain to result, even if the actor doesn't want the consequence to occur.
Offensive
Offends, infringes, or violates plaintiff's reasonable sense of personal dignity.
1. Intentional or reckless action
2. Extreme & outrageous conduct
3. Causation
4. Suffering of Severe Emotional Distress
Necessity
1. Public Necessity (Wegner v. Milwaukee)
2. Private Necessity (Ploof v. Putnam)
Conversion of Chattels
Intentional exercise of dominion over P's chattel that so seriously interfers with P's right to control it that D may be required to pay P the full value of the chattel.
What is Transferred Intent?
Desire to produce any consequence forbidden by the law even if different consequence occurs or different person is affected.
Example of Dual-Intent Battery
McElhaney v. Thomas
Case Example of Assault
Cullison v. Medley - Cullison invited a girl over to talk. Her family went to his house and entered, threatening him while packing a weapon. The weapon was never pulled out, but Cullison feared he would be shot. CT ruled that surrounding Cullison's trailer and threatening him with bodily harm while one of them was armed was assault.
Merchant's Detention
Reasonable belief that property has been taken; detention in a reasonable manner for a reasonable time. Mistake of fact does not lose the privilege.
Defense of Property
Legal justification for using reasonable, non-deadly force to protect one's property from trespass.
Case Example
Baska v. Scherzer - Baska was punched after getting between two boys during a fight. They didn't intend to punch her, but intent was found for the battery under the principle of transferred intent.
Example of Single-Intent Jurisdiction
White v. Muniz --> court found that plaintiff must prove that defendant intended harmful or offensive contact, not just a physical act.
Case Example of IIED
Chanko v. American Broadcasting Companies, Inc. - Plaintiff watched one episode on medical show regarding death of her spouse that she didn't know had been filmed. The crew hadn't informed the family or the medical staff that they were being filmed. The court held that despite the egregious actions of the company, the threashhold for IIED is "extreme and outrageous conduct" which does not apply in this case.
Arrest
Citizen's arrest for public offenses or felony attempt or committed in person's presence. Mistake of fact loses the privilege.
Case Example of Defense of Property
Katko v. Briney: Briney inherited a house that kept getting broken into. She set up a shotgun trap aimed at the feet of an intruder, and a homeless person, Katko, who had stolen empty cans from there before, was shot. He lost an entire leg. The courts found that while the violator was breaking the law, endangering a human life is never an appropriate response to trespass unless the trespassor is threatening a human life.