TORT LAWTORT LAW

INTENTIONAL TORTSINTENTIONAL TORTS

Criminal Law v Tort Law Criminal Law v Tort Law Recap Recap

A crime is wrong against all of A crime is wrong against all of society that gives rise to sanctions society that gives rise to sanctions usually imprisonment.usually imprisonment.

A tort is a civil ‘private’ wrong A tort is a civil ‘private’ wrong where the plaintiff seeks where the plaintiff seeks compensationcompensation from the defendant. from the defendant.

Prosecution v. Plaintiff ?Prosecution v. Plaintiff ? Burden of Proof?Burden of Proof?

Torts OverviewTorts Overview

The law imposes a general duty on everyone The law imposes a general duty on everyone to refrain from injuring others, and to refrain to refrain from injuring others, and to refrain from violating the rights of others. from violating the rights of others.

A A torttort is a is a breachbreach of a of a dutyduty imposed by law imposed by law which results in injury to another. which results in injury to another.

When the plaintiff can prove a defendant’s When the plaintiff can prove a defendant’s breach of a duty has breach of a duty has causedcaused him/her and an him/her and an injuryinjury, the defendant is held responsible, , the defendant is held responsible, and is required to pay and is required to pay damagesdamages to the to the plaintiff.plaintiff.

Types of DamagesTypes of Damages Compensatory:Compensatory: to place the victim in the position to place the victim in the position

he/she was before the tort was he/she was before the tort was committedcommitted..

Punitive : to punishment the defendant for or to to punishment the defendant for or to

make an example of the defendant to make an example of the defendant to others in a similar position. others in a similar position.

Types of TortsTypes of Torts

Intentional Torts Intentional Torts

Negligence TortsNegligence Torts

Strict Liability TortsStrict Liability Torts

What is an intentional What is an intentional tort?tort?

An An intentional tort intentional tort is a breach of the is a breach of the legal duty to refrain from committing legal duty to refrain from committing intentional acts which cause injury to intentional acts which cause injury to others. Most intentional torts involve others. Most intentional torts involve injury to the physical person of injury to the physical person of another, injury to another’s another, injury to another’s reputation, injury to another’s reputation, injury to another’s property, or interference with business property, or interference with business relationships.relationships.

INTENTINTENT

Intent is the first essential element of any Intent is the first essential element of any intentional tort. If there is no intent, intentional tort. If there is no intent, there is no intentional tort. Intent, as there is no intentional tort. Intent, as used in tort law, does not require a used in tort law, does not require a hostile or evil motive. Rather, it means hostile or evil motive. Rather, it means that (1) the actor desires to cause the that (1) the actor desires to cause the consequences of his act, or that (2) he consequences of his act, or that (2) he believes that the consequences are believes that the consequences are substantially certain to result from the substantially certain to result from the act. Examples:act. Examples:

If A fires a gun in the middle of the If A fires a gun in the middle of the Mojave Desert, he intends to fire the Mojave Desert, he intends to fire the gun, but when the bullet hits B, who gun, but when the bullet hits B, who is in the desert without A’s is in the desert without A’s knowledge, A does not intend that knowledge, A does not intend that result. A has not committed an result. A has not committed an intentional tort against B.intentional tort against B.

Types of Intentional TortsTypes of Intentional Torts

Intentional Injure to a Person Intentional Injure to a Person

Intentional Harm of “Real” Intentional Harm of “Real” PropertyProperty

Intentional Harm of “Intellectual Intentional Harm of “Intellectual Property” Property”

BATTERYBATTERY

Essential elements of a battery:Essential elements of a battery: IntentIntent D must set in motion a force directed D must set in motion a force directed

towards the P which results in towards the P which results in physical physical contact contact with the person of the P or with the person of the P or something closely associated with the something closely associated with the person of the P.person of the P.

Such force exercised towards the P must be Such force exercised towards the P must be without the P’s consent and against her will.without the P’s consent and against her will.

Garratt v. DaileyGarratt v. Dailey

Problem 19.1Problem 19.1 P, an arthritic woman, was about to P, an arthritic woman, was about to

sit down in a chair when the D, aged sit down in a chair when the D, aged five years, nine months, suddenly and five years, nine months, suddenly and without warning, pulled the chair out without warning, pulled the chair out from under her. P fell to the ground from under her. P fell to the ground and was injured. P sued D for and was injured. P sued D for damages in battery. May she damages in battery. May she recover?recover?

Yes. Even a joke may result in a battery Yes. Even a joke may result in a battery if the essential elements are present. if the essential elements are present. The pulling of the chair was intentional The pulling of the chair was intentional and done with substantial certainty that and done with substantial certainty that P would attempt to sit where the chair P would attempt to sit where the chair had been. The removal of the chair had been. The removal of the chair caused the physical contact between caused the physical contact between P’s body and the ground. The act was P’s body and the ground. The act was without P’s consent and against her will. without P’s consent and against her will. These facts constitute a battery for These facts constitute a battery for which P may recover in tort.which P may recover in tort.

Fisher v. Carrousel Motor Fisher v. Carrousel Motor HotelHotel

P attended a buffet style luncheon P attended a buffet style luncheon with others. P was standing in line with others. P was standing in line waiting to be served when D waiting to be served when D snatched the plate from P’s hand snatched the plate from P’s hand and shouted that P, a Negro, could and shouted that P, a Negro, could not be served. P sued for battery. not be served. P sued for battery. May he recover?May he recover?

Yes. Although P was not actually Yes. Although P was not actually touched, the unpermitted and touched, the unpermitted and intentional taking of the plate intentional taking of the plate constituted a battery. P was constituted a battery. P was permitted to recover actual damages permitted to recover actual damages which included mental suffering and which included mental suffering and exemplary damages for D’s malicious exemplary damages for D’s malicious conduct.conduct.

ASSAULTASSAULT

Any unexcused and intentional act Any unexcused and intentional act that causes another person to be that causes another person to be apprehensive of immediate harm.apprehensive of immediate harm.

Essential elements:Essential elements: IntentIntent D must set in motion a force directed D must set in motion a force directed

towards the P. Mere words, looks, or towards the P. Mere words, looks, or gestures, without more, however gestures, without more, however violent or insulting, is not an assault.violent or insulting, is not an assault.

D must be able to carry out the threat D must be able to carry out the threat immediately, and there must be some immediately, and there must be some affirmative act to do so.affirmative act to do so.

To the P as a reasonable person, To the P as a reasonable person, there must be the apparent present there must be the apparent present ability to inflict immediate bodily ability to inflict immediate bodily injury.injury.

Problem 19.2Problem 19.2

Cucinotti v. OrtmannCucinotti v. Ortmann

P filed suit alleging that D displayed a P filed suit alleging that D displayed a blackjack and stated that he would blackjack and stated that he would beat the P unless P left the premises. beat the P unless P left the premises. Has P stated a cause of action for Has P stated a cause of action for assault?assault?

No. The mere possession of blackjacks No. The mere possession of blackjacks by D and others with him did not by D and others with him did not convert the unactionable words into a convert the unactionable words into a cause of action. To convert a threat cause of action. To convert a threat into an assault, there must be some act into an assault, there must be some act to show that a battery will follow to show that a battery will follow immediately. The complaint did not immediately. The complaint did not allege that the blackjacks were shown allege that the blackjacks were shown to P in a manner that would amount to to P in a manner that would amount to an offer to commit a battery. an offer to commit a battery. Therefore, P’s complaint was dismissed.Therefore, P’s complaint was dismissed.

Allen v. HannafordAllen v. Hannaford

P rented an apartment from D, but was P rented an apartment from D, but was behind in her rent payments. While P behind in her rent payments. While P was having her furniture moved out of was having her furniture moved out of the apartment, D pointed a pistol at P the apartment, D pointed a pistol at P and threatened to shoot her in order to and threatened to shoot her in order to prevent P from moving her furniture. P prevent P from moving her furniture. P sued D for assault. D contended no sued D for assault. D contended no assault was committed because of the assault was committed because of the lack of evidence that the pistol was lack of evidence that the pistol was loaded. Is this an assault?loaded. Is this an assault?

Yes. Even if there were no actual Yes. Even if there were no actual present ability to shoot P, the present ability to shoot P, the apparent present ability is just as apparent present ability is just as effective in causing fright as though effective in causing fright as though the gun were loaded. Actual ability is the gun were loaded. Actual ability is not necessary. Therefore, D not necessary. Therefore, D committed the tort of assault.committed the tort of assault.

False ImprisonmentFalse Imprisonment

The intentional un-privileged, non-The intentional un-privileged, non-consensual, confinement of another consensual, confinement of another by physical barriers or by physical by physical barriers or by physical force or threats of forceforce or threats of force

Problem 19.4Problem 19.4

INTENTIONAL INFLICTION INTENTIONAL INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESSOF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS

Essential elements:Essential elements: The defendant intended to cause the The defendant intended to cause the

plaintiff emotional distressplaintiff emotional distress A reasonable person would consider the A reasonable person would consider the

defendants actions extreme and outrageousdefendants actions extreme and outrageous The plaintiff suffers emotional distressThe plaintiff suffers emotional distress A reasonable person would consider the A reasonable person would consider the

plaintiff distress severe plaintiff distress severe i.e. Tyler Clemente Casei.e. Tyler Clemente Case

DefamationDefamation A false, unprivileged statement of fact A false, unprivileged statement of fact

communicated to a third person, communicated to a third person, which causes damage to a person’s or which causes damage to a person’s or a product’s reputation.a product’s reputation.

SlanderSlander- transitory, oral or spoken- transitory, oral or spoken Libel Libel – more permanent, written form– more permanent, written form

Intent? –

Injury? – To reputation by exposing to hatred, ridicule or contempt

Defamation- Public Defamation- Public FiguresFigures

Public figures: must show Public figures: must show actual actual malice malice on the part of tortfeasoron the part of tortfeasor

• Media has a qualified privilege to defame public figures

• Problem 19.5

Actual malice: the intent to specifically destroy the plaintiff’s public reputation