Defenses Against Intentional Torts
1. Introduction to Defenses Against Intentional Torts
Common Defenses: Consent and Self-Defense are most frequent, often used to negate elements of a plaintiff's claim.
Additional Defenses: Defense of Others, Defense of Property, Public Necessity, and Private Necessity provide justification for actions that would otherwise be tortious.
2. Consent
Nature of Consent:
A crucial defense for the defendant to plead, shifting the burden to them to prove its existence and scope.
May also be an element for the plaintiff to overcome; for instance, if the plaintiff consented to physical contact, it could defeat a claim of battery; or if they consented to entry on land, it would defeat a claim of trespass.
Scope of Consent:
Liability may arise if the contact, entry, or action performed exceeds the specific scope of consent given. For example, consent to a medical procedure does not typically extend to an entirely different, unauthorized procedure.
Difficult questions often concern whether consent was given at all (e.g., implied vs. express) and its specific boundaries or limitations.
Validity of Consent:
Consent given through fraud (misrepresentation of a material fact), mistake (unilateral or mutual, impacting the nature of the act itself), duress (coercion or compulsion), or incapacity (minority, mental impairment, intoxication) is generally considered invalid and therefore ineffective as a defense.
For instance, a minor cannot legally consent to certain medical procedures without parental permission, and a person who is highly intoxicated cannot give valid consent.
O
Key Questions:
Evidence of assault (battery) by the defendant's surgeon upon the plaintiff?
Evidence of defendant's negligence towards the plaintiff?
Facts for Battery Claim:
Plaintiff, O'Brien, was vaccinated by the ship's surgeon en route from Queenstown to Boston in 1891.
It was an undisputed fact that strict quarantine regulations in Boston required either vaccination or a certificate of recent vaccination for landing.
Ship surgeons routinely vaccinated emigrants who needed it, providing certificates accepted at quarantine upon arrival.
Notices of these regulations and the availability of vaccination services were prominently posted throughout the ship.
Plaintiff's actions:
O'Brien observed approximately women passengers assembled for vaccination.
She stood about feet away, watched them line up, be examined by the surgeon, and then vaccinated.
When her turn came, she voluntarily showed her arm to the surgeon.
The surgeon indicated there was no vaccination mark from a previous inoculation and she was vaccinated.
Court's Reasoning and Outcome: The court found no evidence of battery. By her actions of standing in line, observing the process, and then presenting her arm, O'Brien impliedly consented to the vaccination. Her actions objectively signified her willingness to receive the vaccine, despite any internal or uncommunicated reservation she might have had. The surgeon was justified in inferring her consent from her behavior, given the context of the posted notices and the general practice on board.
3. Self-Defense
Nature and Scope: A person is privileged to use reasonable force to defend themselves against a reasonably perceived threat of immediate bodily harm or offensive contact.
Reasonable Belief: The defense requires an honest and reasonable belief that force is necessary. This is judged by an objective standard, meaning a reasonable person in the same circumstances would believe the force necessary.
Proportionality: The force used in self-defense must be proportionate to the threatened harm. Deadly force is generally only permissible when facing a threat of deadly force or serious bodily injury.
Duty to Retreat: In some jurisdictions, there may be a duty to retreat before using deadly force, especially if one can safely do so. However, many jurisdictions recognize the "stand your ground" doctrine, particularly in one's home.
4. Defense of Others
Principle: One may use reasonable force to protect a third person from harm if they reasonably believe the third person is in imminent danger. The intervener steps into the shoes of the person being defended.
Reasonable Mistake: A reasonable mistake regarding the need for defense or the amount of force necessary to protect the third party will often be excused.
5. Defense of Property
Right to Defend: A property owner may use reasonable non-deadly force to prevent or terminate an unauthorized intrusion or dispossession of their property.
Limitations: Deadly force is never permissible merely to protect property. The use of force must be proportionate to the threat to the property, and there is generally no right to use force if the intrusion is privileged (e.g., by necessity).
Recapture of Chattels: One may use reasonable force to recapture personal property unlawfully taken, but generally only if the recapture is attempted promptly and the owner is in "hot pursuit" of the wrongdoer.
6. Public Necessity
Principle: A person is privileged to enter land or interfere with another's chattels if it is reasonably necessary to avert a public disaster (e.g., stopping a fire from spreading through a town).
Absolute Defense: This is an absolute defense, meaning no compensation is owed for damages caused, as long as the actions taken were reasonably necessary to protect the public at large.
7. Private Necessity
Principle: A person is privileged to enter land or interfere with another's chattels to protect their own person or property, or that of a few others, from a threatened harm.
Incomplete Defense: Unlike public necessity, private necessity is an "incomplete privilege." While the actor is not liable for trespass or conversion, they are liable for any actual damages caused to the property (e.g., if a ship docks at a private pier during a storm to save itself, it must pay for any damage to the pier).