Torts I: Rules for all intentional torts

Volition

Decide to do it, exercising will

(…act with intent to cause ____)

Intent

Desire to cause ___ OR knowledge to a substantial certainty that ___ will occur

Intent for Kids

They can have intent when they can understand that the act will lead to the consequences

Intent for "Insane" People

If they are capable of entertaining the intent and does entertain the intent.

Transferred intent

Desire can transfer, targets transfer, torts transfer. You did not intend to hit what you hit, and made a mistake but still have…

intent…intent

Mistake/Jokes does not negate ___. Generally mistake of identity does not negate___, and thus the defendant is liable.

Risk Continuum

4 levels:

- Desire to cause risk—intentional tort

- Knowledge to a substantial certainty—intentional tort

- Recklessness—Gross negligence

- Foreseeable risk—negligence

Rule for Battery

Volitional act w/intent to cause harmful or offensive contact with a person AND causes harmful or offensive contact with a person or third party directly or indirectly.

In Battery Rule- Intent Definition

- Desire or knowledge to a substantial certainty (Garratt)

- If insane: capable of entertaining intent and did entertain the intent (McGuire)

- If child: can have intent if can understand act will lead to consequences (subjective) (Garratt)

- Motive: meant it as a joke, no intent harm, ie. meant to be beneficial- not negate intent (Ranson) (mistake)

In Battery Rule- Harmful

Bodily damage, structural or functional like a good operation, and does not matter if harm is worse than intended; do not need to be aware at the time of the contact (need not be aware at time of contact)

In Battery Rule- Offensive

To an ordinary person not unduly sensitive to personal dignity (objective) (Wallace)

In Battery Rule- Contact

With a person or something integrally connected to the person (Fisher)

In Battery Rule- Third Party

Transferred intent (Talmage)

In Battery Rule- Damages

1. Nominals- no physical or emotional harm

2. Compensatory or actual: physical or emotional harm

3. Punitives: not just intentional but malicious and outrageous conduct

Rule for Assault

Volitional act with intent to cause reasonable apprehension of imminent harmful or offensive contact with a person and causes reasonable apprehension of imminent harmful or offensive contact with a person or third party, directly or indirectly.

Volition, intent, harmful, contact, offensive, damages, indirectly, third party are same defs as in battery

In Assault Rule- Act

- Overt act, usually movement towards

- Words alone not enough unless a reasonable person would be apprehensive

- Words + acts work together

In Assault Rule: Conditional threats- Act

This is not enough to be an act bc there is no reasonable apprehensions. ____ that are based on non existent facts are not sufficient bc no reasonable apprehension. Example: (If you were not an old man I would hit you)

In Assault Rule: Unlawful conditions- Act

This can be considered a sufficient act. Example: (Your money or your life.)

In Assault Rule: Where in control- Act

This is not a sufficient act as long as not unlawful conditions. Example: "(Get off my porch or I’ll get ya.)

In Assault Rule: Danger from an independent source + if you report it- Act

This is considered not a sufficient act, unless it's a joke or you put the danger there

In Assault Rule- Reasonable

A reasonable person in circumstances would be apprehensive

In Assault Rule- Apprehension

1. Know it is happening

2. Anticipation is enough, do not need fear

3. Apparent ability to carry out consequences

In Assault Rule- Imminent

More than mere preparation (mere prep)

Rule for False Imprisonment

Volitional act with intent to cause confinement or restraint of a person within boundaries fixed by defendant AND directly or indirectly causes such confinement to a person or third party and the person is conscious of confinement or harmed.

Volition, intent, indirectly, third party, and damages are same defs as in battery

In False Impris. Rule- Confinement/restraint

1. Must be against your will (Hardy)

2. Through force or threat of force, usually

a. Not if you stay for reasons of moral persuasion

b. Not future threats; or conditional threats unless they impose an unlawful condition

c. Not if agreed to confinement but if (you) change mind (you) must be released

3. No reasonable means of escape

a. A reasonable means of escape is:

• One plaintiff knows of + is apparent

• No peril to life or limb

• Where you are not required to do an unlawful condition

In False Impris. Rule- Boundaries fixed by defendant

- Can be moving car

- Not if only bar path in

- City, state, country?

limited area (Big Town)

In False Impris. Rule- Such

- Within boundaries fixed by the defendant

Ex: I wanted to confine you in a house but I ended up confining you in a shed, the confinement changed, you might have intended a confinement but ended up getting a different confinement

Rule for IIED- Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress

Volitional act with intent to cause, or recklessly disregard the high probability of causing, severe emotional distress, through the extreme and outrageous conduct, AND causes severe emotional distress to a person or a bystander.

Volitional same def as in battery

In IIED Rule- Intent OR...

same definition from battery or recklessly disregard the high probability

In IIED Rule- Extreme & outrageous conduct

- Has to be beyond the bounds of decency or/ what civilization would tolerate (Siliznoff)

- Not insults, profanities unless

- Aware of particular vulnerability

- Or they are apparent

- Common carriers, hotel, public utilities (require more courtesy)

In IIED Rule- Severe emotional distress

distress so severe, more than reasonable person expected to endure (Slocum/Harris)

In IIED Rule- Bystander

- Defendant knew (that) plaintiff (was) present and witnessed

- Where person being attacked and bystander not related, the bystander needs a physical manifestation of S.E.D.

In IIED Rule- Damages

- No nominals

- Actuals for S.E.D. (severe emotional distress)

- Can have also have damages for personal injury

- Punitives

Rule for Trespass to Land

Volitional act with intent to enter another's land and does enter the land.

Volitional same def as in battery

In Trespass to Land Rule- Intent

same definition from battery and

- Even if (you have a) good faith belief had right to enter but mistaken (Dougherty)

- Even if not mean any harm

In Trespass to Land Rule- Another's

- Owner

- Possessor

In Trespass to Land Rule- Land

- The air- immediate reaches and substantial interference with use and enjoyment (Herrin)

- Below the ground- to the extent could or did use and the entry interfered with use of the land

In Trespass to Land Rule- Enter

Physically invade without permission or knowingly remain after consent/ permission withdrawn (Rogers)

In Trespass to Land Rule- Damages

- Nominals

- Compensatory (personal injury, emotional distress)

- Punitives

In Trespass to Chattel Rule- Intent

same as battery and...

- Mistake is no defense

- Not intend harm, no defense

In Trespass to Chattel Rule- Interference

- With dominion and control

In Trespass to Chattel Rule- Possession

Need not be owner- bailee

In Trespass to Chattel Rule- Chattel

Tangible personal property or intangible (E.g. promise) that has physical representation (such as a promissory (p.) note, deed)

Rule for Conversion

Volitional act with intent to cause substantial interference with a person's ownership or possession of chattel AND does substantially interfere with a person's ownership or possession of chattel.

Volitional same def as in battery; Intent, Interference, Possession same def as in Trespass to chattel

In Conversion Rule- Substantial Factor 1

Dont need all four

• (More likely the) greater the extent and longer the duration of dominion + control

Longer, more complete control → more likely conversion.

Example: Borrowing someone’s car without permission for 3 days (conversion) vs. sitting in it for 5 minutes without permission (trespass to chattel).

In Conversion Rule- Substantial Factor 2

• …greater the extent of harm

Greater damage → more likely conversion.

Example: Smashing someone’s phone (conversion) vs. temporarily draining its battery (trespass to chattel).

In Conversion Rule- Substantial Factor 3

• …greater the expense + inconvenience

More costly or burdensome interference → more likely conversion.

Example: Taking someone’s laptop so they miss an exam and must replace it (conversion) vs. moving their backpack across the room (trespass to chattel).

In Conversion Rule- Substantial Factor 4

• Bad faith- if you find bad faith it is more likely conversion but it is not required. (Additional verbal notes: Bad faith is that you do it for a bad reason- angry, wanted revenge, opposite of good faith)

Not required, but strengthens the case.

Example: Selling stolen jewelry (conversion) vs. mistakenly borrowing a pen, thinking it’s yours (less likely conversion).

In Conversion Rule- Chattel

No longer fixed to the land

In Conversion Rule- Damages

- Actuals/ consequentials

- FMV (fair market value)= forced sale

- E.d. (emotional distress is possible)

- Punitives- unless 3rd party purchase

In Trespass to Chattel Rule- Interference: Dispossession

This is a temporary taking for some time or a refusal to return (after voluntarily given) (measure of harm could be the loss of use, could be a low $#- dollar number) and/or

In Trespass to Chattel Rule- Interference: Intermeddling

This is only physical contact, not taken; harm could be- impaired condition (Glidden), impaired quality, impaired value (CompuServe); or harm to legally protected right (CompuServe- E.g. harm of goodwill, business rep)