Torts--Jack

Proportionality

“an actor may use force…to

(1) the interest the actor is protecting; and

(2) the injury or harm threatened by the other.”

General Rule for Self Defense

in Slayton v. McDonald

Generally, one is not justified in using a dangerous weapon in self-defense if the attacking party is not armed but only commits battery with his fists or in some manner not inherently dangerous to life.

Allstate Insurance Co. v. Hague Facts

• Wisconsin citizen killed in motorcycle accident in Wisconsin

• Widow sued insurance co. in Minnesota

Allstate Insurance Co. v. Hague Rule

• U.S.S.C. allowed Minnesota to apply pro-plaintiff insurance law on grounds that:

• #1) Descendent employed in and commuted to Minnesota prior to his death

• #2) Insurance Company did business in Minnesota

• #3) Subsequent to accident, widow moved to Minnesota

Definition of Tort Law

Collection of principles describing the legal system’s civil response to injuries one person inflicts on another

Dual Intent Rule of Battery

“Waters v. Blackshear”

“An actor is subject to liability for batter if:

(a) Acts intending to cause a harmful or offensive contact

(b) a harmful contact with the person of the other directly or indirectly results.”

Rule on Intent

Polmatier v. Russ

“It is not necessary for a defendant reason and motives for forming his intention to be rational in order for him to have the intent to invade the interests of another.”

The Act Requirement of an Intentional Tort

“Polmatier v. Russ”

Two-Step Process:

#1) The Act Requirement

• ∆ “intended the act that produced the injury”

#2) The Intent Requirement

• ∆ “intended the resulting injury to the descendent”

White v. University of Idaho Issue and Conclusion

Issue: Single Intent

Conclusion: Under dual intent analysis, ∆ (UofI teacher) would not be held liable as did NOT intend harmful or offensive contact, but liable under single intent analysis

Transferred Intent Example

If ∆ throws a rock at B, hoping to hit B, but ∆’s aim is bad and ∆ hits C instead. Although ∆ had no tortious intent toward C in this example, ∆ did have tortious intent toward B. In such cases, courts hold that the tortious intent to hit B transfers to C.

Bodily Harm Defintion

R2 Torts § 15

“any physical impairment of the condition of another’s body, or physical pain or illness.”

Offensive Contact Definition

R2 Torts § 19

“offends a reasonable sense of personal dignity.”

Assault Definition

The defendant must (1) act with intent (2) to place the victim in apprehension of a harmful or offensive contact or to make such a contact, and (3) the victim must reasonably be placed in apprehension of such a contact.

Strauss v. Cilek Issue

Whether π can maintain a claim for intentional infliction of emotional distress over an extra-marital affair

Strauss v. Cilek Rule

“To be outrageous the conduct must be so extreme in degree as to go beyond all possible bounds of decency to be regarded as atrocious and utterly intolerable in civilized community.”

Rule on Extreme and Outrageous Conduct

Dana v. Oak Park Marina, Inc.

R2 Torts § 46(1)

“One who by extreme and outrageous conduct intentionally or recklessly causes severe emotional distress to another is subject to liability for such emotional distress.” 

Trespass Definition

• “Invasion

• which interfered with the right of exclusive possession of the land, and

• which was the direct result of some act committed by the defendant.”

Elements of Trespass

1) Intentional

2) Entry

3) One the land of another