1
What are the major intentional torts against property?
The major intentional torts against property are conversion, trespass to chattels, and trespass to land.
What is an act of omission?
An act of omission occurs when a person fails to act, provided that the law imposes an affirmative duty upon that person to act. An affirmative duty to act often arises in the context of a special relationship between the actor and the victim.
What is an act of commission?
An act of commission is an affirmative or voluntary act. Often, this refers to a movement of the body that produces a discernible effect.
What are the major intentional torts against persons?
The major intentional torts against persons are
1. battery,
2. assault,
3. intentional infliction of emotional distress,
4. and false imprisonment.
Define FIT BAT
F alse I mprisonment, T respass (to land), B attery A ssault T respass (Chattle or personal property).
Which case is tied to this?
Because Def's volitional act of lunging at Pl caused Pl's reasonable apprehension of imminent harmful or offensive contact, it was Assault even though Def could not have contacted Pl across the wide counter between them.
Western Union Telegraph Co. v. Hill
The element of lack of consent to the particular contact is an essential element of____________________
Battery
From CACI
What constitutes indirect physical contact in the context of the intentional tort of battery?
Indirect contact, in the context of the intentional tort of battery, occurs when the actor causes a harmful or offensive contact with something intimately connected to the victim’s body. The actor does not need to intend to harm the victim. It is sufficient if the actor intends to cause the contact.
Which case is this connected to?
In a jurisdiction requiring contemporaneous knowledge of confinement, Pl who was drunk when police took him to an abandoned golf course 350 feet from the NY Thruway which he entered and where they were struck by a car was unable to produce evidence he was aware of confinement at the time, failed to state a claim for False Imprisonment under NY law.
Pafvi v. City of Kingston
Court of Appeals of NY, 1977
True or False
In the context of tort law, “malfeasance” is at a higher level of wrongdoing than nonfeasance (failure to act where there was a duty to act) or misfeasance (conduct that is lawful but harms another person financially or physically due to carelessness or an accident)
True
What is CACI 1600?
Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress
In the context of an intentional tort, what does it mean if a defendant acts with substantial certainty?
In the context of an intentional tort, a defendant acts with substantial certainty if the defendant is aware that a particular outcome is virtually certain to result from the defendant’s actions. In intentional torts, an actor’s intent can mean purpose or substantial certainty.
Nonfeasance acts are subject to the four-prong test. What is the four-prong test?
The elements of the four-prong test are:
1. negligence,
2. breach of duty,
3. causation, and
4. injury.
***Most nonfeasance acts are a breach of the rules in negligence and breach of duty.
How does intent differ from motive?
Intent differs from motive in that intent describes a person’s choice to act in a particular way or to cause a particular result and motive describes a person’s reasons for making that choice. A person can commit an intentional tort without having an evil motive or a desire to cause harm.
What are the following types of physical contact that will satisfy the tort of battery?
1. direct contact,
2. indirect contact,
3. remote contact
Keep in mind that the actor does not need to intend to harm or offend the victim. It is sufficient if the actor intends to cause the contact.
Where do these essential elements belong to:
(1) defendant acted with intent to cause harmful or offensive contact, or threatened to touch plaintiff in a harmful or offensive manner;
(2) plaintiff reasonably believed she was about to be touched in a harmful or offensive manner or it reasonably appeared to plaintiff that defendant was about to carry out the threat;
(3) plaintiff did not consent to defendant’s conduct;
(4) plaintiff was harmed; and
(5) defendant’s conduct was a substantial factor in causing plaintiff’s harm.
Cause of action for assault
What are these all an example of?
1. intentionally deprive Paul of freedom of movement by use of physical barriers/force/threats of force/menace/fraud/deceit/unreasonable duress
2. The restraint/confinement/detention compelled Paul to stay or go somewhere for some appreciable time, however short.
3. That Paul did not knowingly or voluntarily consent.
4. That Paul was actually harmed
5. That Dan's conduct was a substantial factor in causing Paul's harm.
False Imprisonment
No arrest involved
True or False
‘If defendant unlawfully aims at one person and hits another he is guilty of assault and battery on the party he hit, the injury being the direct, natural and
probable consequence of the wrongful act.’
True
Which case is this statement connected to?
Because the nursing home would not allow resident who was admitted voluntarily to leave, refused to allow him access to a telephone, and then restrained him in a locked ward, they are liable for False imprisonment.
Big Town Nursing Home, Inc v. Newman
In the context of an intentional tort, what does it mean when an actor acts with intention?
In the context of an intentional tort, an actor acts with purpose if the actor has the conscious objective to do a particular thing or cause a particular result. In intentional torts, an actor’s intent can mean purpose or substantial certainty.
Please connect this to which case:
Because "moral persuasion" is not enough to constitute force or threat of force, temporary clerk in jewelry department who was led to manager's office who remained there to clear her name by taking a lie detector test was not deprived of her freedom of movement.
Hardy v. LaBelle's Distributing Co.
Supreme Court of Montana, 1983
What is the doctrine of transferred intent?
The doctrine of transferred intent allows a plaintiff to establish the element of intent in cases in which the defendant intended to commit an intentional tort against one person but ended up committing:
In these cases, the defendant’s initial intent will transfer to the tort the defendant actually committed or the person the defendant actually harmed. The doctrine of transferred intent applies only to five intentional torts: (1) assault, (2) battery, (3) false imprisonment, (4) trespass to land, and (5) trespass to chattels.
Is an actor liable for battery even if the actor didn’t have any personal hostility toward the victim or a desire to injure the victim?
Yes. An actor is liable to another for battery if: (1) the actor acts with the intent to cause harmful or offensive contact with the victim or (2) direct or indirect harmful contact with a victim results from the actor’s acts.
An actor doesn’t need to be inspired by any personal hostility toward the victim and the victim doesn’t need to have a desire to injure the victim to be found liable for battery.
What rule is this?
Provides that a defendant is fully liable for harm caused by the defendant’s tort even if the severity of the harm is due to a plaintiff’s innate condition or vulnerability. This is true even if the plaintiff’s condition or vulnerability is one of which the defendant could not have been aware.
The eggshell-skull-plaintiff's rule.
Define FITTED CAB
F alse I mprisonment, T respass (to land), T respass (to chattel, or personal property), E motional D istress, C onversion, A ssault, and B attery.