Intentional Torts Restatements

Intent

RTT (LPEH) §1. Intent

A person acts with the intent to produce a consequence if:

a)    A person acts with the purpose of producing the consequence; or

b)    The person acts knowing that the consequence is substantially certain to result

Battery

Four requirements for battery – RTT (IT) §1:

1. Must be intentional – RTT (IT) §2

2. Must be contact

3. Intended contact must be harmful or offensive to the victim

4. No consent to the action

Assault

Assault must have… (RTT (IT) §5)

•  Intent

  •  To cause apprehension of contact OR substantial certainty that apprehension will occur

• The victim must reasonably be placed in apprehension of such a contact

Trespass to Real Property

Trespass can be… RST §158:

• Entering land in possession of the other or causing someone/something to do so OR

• Remaining on the land OR

• Failing to remove from the land a thing which he is under duty to remove.

Intentional Infliction of Emotional Harm

RTT: LPEH §46. Intentional (or Reckless) infliction of Emotional Harm

An actor who by extreme and outrageous conduct intentionally or recklessly causes severe emotional harm to another is subject to liability for that emotional harm and, if the emotional harm causes bodily harm, also for the bodily harm

Offensive Battery

A contact is offensive if… (RTT (IT) §3)

• the contact is offensive to a reasonable sense of personal dignity (Alcorn v. Mitchell); OR

• the actor knows that the contact is highly offensive to the other person and the actor contacts the other with the primary purpose that the contact will be highly offensive (Republica v. De Longchamps)

Apprehension

RST §24 What Constitutes Apprehension

a.    the other must believe that the act may result in imminent contact

Conversion

Intentional interference with dominion over property or chattel that so seriously interferes with the right of another to control it that the actor may justly be required to pay the other the full value of that chattel. (RST §222A)

Battery Prima Facie Case

• Act

• Intent - intending to cause a harmful or offensive contact with person or third person, or an imminent apprehension of such a contact

  • Dual Intent Standard: must intend to cause contact and intend to either cause harm or offend (Vosburg)

  • Single Intent Standard: just intent to cause contact (Vosburg comes out same)

    • RTT § 102 Battery: Required Intent: intent required is intent to cause contact w/ the person of another. Actor need not intend to cause harm to the other.

    • Intent to touch enough for battery, per RTT

  • Transferred Intent: intent transfers to “third person” even if D didn’t intent specifically towards P, so long as was intended action and unwarranted injury towards someone

    • However, note RST § 14 – to make liable for battery, harm must be caused by an act done by person whose liability is in question (D)

  • Imminent Apprehension: ex – when A fires warning shot which ricochets + hits B – battery b/c intended to cause imminent apprehension

• Tort - Harmful contact occurs

• Causation - As direct or indirect result

• Damages

• Lack of Consent — Affirmative Defense

Prima Facie Case — Offensive Battery (RST 18)

• Act

• Intent - intending to cause a harmful or offensive contact with person or third person, or an imminent apprehension of such a contact

  • Note on Transferred Intent

    • Battery transfers from object to person (hitting the cane of the ambassador counts as hitting the ambassador himself)

• Tort – Offensive contact occurs

  • RST § 19 What Constitutes Offensive Contact

    • A bodily contact is offensive if it offends a reasonable sense of personal dignity.

    • Act that would offend the ordinary person and as such one not unduly sensitive as to his personal dignity (unwarranted by social usages of time and place)

• Causation – As direct or indirect result

• Damages

• Lack of Consent

Prima Facie Case — Assault (RST 21)

• Act

• Intent

  • intending to cause a harmful or offensive contact with person or third person, or an imminent apprehension of such a contact

• Tort — Other is put in imminent apprehension

  • RST §24 What Constitutes Apprehension

    • Must believe act will result in imminent contact unless prevented from so resulting by the other’s self-defensive act/flight/intervention

      • Allen v Hannaford (WA, 1926). D threatens another with an unloaded pistol. Found guilty b/c of apprehensions created in mind of another

    • Could feel apprehension without fear (Sykes could assault a linebacker, as long as there’s apprehension – doesn’t matter if action would be effective)

  • Timing: must be imminent (I can’t assault you by saying I’ll hurt you next Tuesday)

    • Generally, words alone do not meet the bar for causing imminent apprehension (Brower v. Ackerly)

• Causation — As a direct or indirect result

• Damages

• Lack of Consent

Prima Facie Case — Trespass (to real property) 

• Act

• Intent — Only intent that matters here is intent to enter property (not, e.g., to enter someone else’s property

• Tort — any unauthorized entry into another’s real property

  • Includes entrance above and below land, though airspace is generally not included given societal complexity

• Causation — As a direct or indirect result

• Damages

  • If tangible intrusion - Can still recover in the absence of damage to property

  • If intangible intrusion (noise, radiation) – must be able to prove physical damage

    • Reduction in fair value of real property or nominal damages if no harm done. Harms caused while trespassing are included

• Lack of Consent

Prima Facie Case — Trespass to Chattels

• Act

• Intent —  intent to use the property

  • Malice or fault are irrelevant here

• Tort — dispossession or interference with personal property (RST § 218)

  • Dispossession of chattel, impairment to chattel, or deprivation of chattel usage for substantial amount of time

  • Not necessarily stealing, but could be

  • Spray painting of a car would be one example

• Causation — As direct or indirect result

• Damages — Must be actual harm to chattel before recovery

• Lack of Consent

Prima Facie Case — Conversion 

• Act

• Intent — intent to convert property that is not yours

  • Malice or fault are irrelevant here

  • Mistaken ownership is irrelevant

• Tort — The intentional exercise of dominion or control over a chattel which so seriously interferes with the right of another to control it that the actor may justly be required to pay the other full value of the chattel (RST § 222A)

• Causation

• Damages

  • Must be actual harm to chattel before recovery

  • Typically recover value of item less the cost of work that D put into it to improve it

    • If items are returned, D is liable for the value of the time that D held the items and the damage to the items

• Lack of Consent

Prima Facie Case — False Imprisonment

• Act

• Intent

  • Malice not required

  • Intend to confine someone

• Tort — force or threat of force that results in imprisonment or confinement

  • Actual force/threat of force required, obstruction of movement in a particular direction is not enough

  • Most common ex: shoplifting. Merchants and shopkeepers are privileged to imprison in certain situations, but must be reasonable

• Causation

• Damages

• Lack of Consent

Prima Facie Case — Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress

• Act

• Intent

  • Transferred Intent – liable to immediate family if present at the time (regardless of bodily harm), but only liable to other third parties if bodily harm occurs

• Tort — extreme and outrageous conduct that intentionally or recklessly causes severe emotional distress (RST §46)

  • High standard for outrageousness

  • If D knows that P has certain sensitivity and intentionally causes emotional harm, would convert something that normally wouldn’t be outrageous to outrageous (Long

• Causation

• Damages

• Lack of Consent