Intentional Torts

Card Set Information

Author:
ngoodman3
ID:
240059
Filename:
Intentional Torts
Updated:
2013-10-11 16:36:15
Tags:
Intentional Torts IIED assault intent
Folders:

Description:
Intentional Torts
Show Answers:

Home > Flashcards > Print Preview

The flashcards below were created by user ngoodman3 on FreezingBlue Flashcards. What would you like to do?


  1. Apprehension Not Necessary (Battery)
    A person may recover for battery even though he is not conscious of the contact when it occurs.

    EXAMPLE: Unauthorized surgery performed on unconscious patient.
  2. Causation (Battery)
    D is liable for direct and indirect contact. It will be sufficient if D SETS IN MOTION A FORCE that brings about harmful or offensive contact to P's person.
  3. P's Person (Battery)
    Anything connected to P
  4. Harmful or Offensive Contact (Battery)
    Contact is harmful if it causes actual injury, pain, or disfigurement.

    Contact is offensive if it would be considered offensive by a REASONABLE PERSON of ordinary sensibilities; or if P has not expressly or impliedly consented to it.
  5. To establish a prima facie case for battery, the following elements must be proved:
    1) An act by D which brings about HARMFUL or OFFENSIVE CONTACT to P's person;

    2) INTENT on the part of D to bring about harmful or offensive contact to P's person; and

    3) CAUSATION
  6. Causation
    Conduct of D is a substantial factor in bringing about the injury.
  7. Limitations of Transferred Intent
    Transferred intent may be invoked only where the tort intended and the tort that results are both within the following list:

    • 1) Assault
    • 2) Battery
    • 3) False Imprisonment
    • 4) Trespass to Land
    • 5) Trespass to Chattels
  8. General Rule of Transferred Intent
    The transferred intent doctrine applies where D intends to commit a tort against one person but instead:

    (1) commits a different tort against that person, or 

    (2) commits the same tort as intended but against another person, or

    (3) commits a different tort against a different person

    The intent to commit a tort against one person is transferred to the other tort or to the injured person.
  9. Actor Need Not Intend Injury
    The intent to bring about the consequences that are the basis of the tort. A person may be liable even for an unintended injury if he intended to bring about such "basis of the the tort" consequences. 

    EXAMPLE: A intends to push B and does so. B falls and breaks his arm. A's conduct gives rise to the "harmful or offensive contact" of battery.
  10. General Intent
    An actor "intends" the consequences of his conduct if he KNOWS WITH SUBSTANTIAL CERTAINTY that these consequences will result.
  11. Specific Intent
    An actor "intends" the consequences of his conduct if his PURPOSE in acting is to bring about these consequences.
  12. Intent Requirement for Intentional Tort Liability
    • a) Specific
    • b) General
    • c) Actor Need Not Intend Injury
    • d) Transferred Intent
    • e) Motive Distinguished
    • f) Minors & Incompetents
  13. Act Requirement for Intentional Tort Liability
    Volitional (voluntary) Movement
  14. To establish a prima facie case for intentional tort liability, it is generally necessary that P prove the following:
    (1) Act by D;

    (2) Intent; and

    (3) Causation
  15. Elements of Trespass to Chattel
    (1) Conduct 

    (2) intended to cause and causing interference with

    (3) personal property possessed by another 

    (4) w/o consent/privilege.


    • Use if you want chattel back. (care gets messed up but want $ from repairs).

    • Not attached to land: Personal property.

    • Need actual damages. Quality of property impaired. o Physical damageso Deprive person of possessory rights for a substantial enough period. 

    • Less serious than conversion.
  16. To establish a prima facie case of trespass to land, the following elements must be met:
    1) An act of physical invasion

    2) Intent on D's part to bring about a physical invasion of P's real property; and

    3) Causation


  17. To establish a prima facie case for intentional infliction of emotional distress, the following elements must be proved:
    (1) An act by D amounting to extreme and outrageous conduct

    • (2) D intends to cause P to suffer severe emotional distress, or recklessness
    • (3) Causation; and

    (4) Damages - severe emotional distress.
  18. Confinement of Property (Proving Confinement - False Imprisonment)
    Confinement of Property/3rd party: reasonable person test

    • When a reasonable person would feel confined because property or 3rd party is confined (example: mechanic keeps car)
  19. Duty to Release(Proving Confinement - False Imprisonment)
    If you forget to release and never intended to release will be held to intent of initial confinement. (Don’t mix up w/moral, social duty).
  20. Threat of Force(Proving Confinement - False Imprisonment)
    • 1) Person (not physical, its verbal): Reasonable person test. i.e. “don’t move or ill shoot you.”
    • • Imminent force

    • 2) Property/3rd party: Reasonable person again. Diamond>toothbrush. 
    • • Confined against threat of harming others/property.

    • 3) Legal authority (law requires you stay)
    • • Assertion legal authority
  21. What is physical confinement?(Proving Confinement - False Imprisonment)
    1) Physical confinement: Force against Person. Facts show locked in, no reasonable means of escape. (if put in harm when escaping there is p.c.)

    2) Physical confinement: Force against Property
  22. How does one prove confinement? (Proving Confinement - False Imprisonment)
    Use the reasonable person test
  23. What are the deciding factors for false imprisonment?
    i. Did conduct cause confinement? and 

    ii. Did D intent to cause confinement? Confinement has to be intended.
  24. Elements of False Imprisonment
    • (1) Conduct 
    • (2) intended to cause and causing
    • (3) confinement 
    • (4) w/o consent or privilege.
  25. Is mistake of fact a defense for intent?
    If you could prove intent, MOF does not remove it.
  26. Does mistake of fact prove intent? If you could prove intent, does mistake of act remove it?
    Mistake of fact does not prove intent, if you could prove intent, MOF does not remove it.
  27. Mistake of Fact
    Purpose to do wrong, mistake of fact is irrelevant. 

    EXAMPLE: giving jewelry to mistaken person: Purpose was to put in hands of another.
  28. Does mental disability affect intent?
    Mental disability does not affect intent.
  29. Does age affect intent?
    Age does not affect intent.
  30. 3 ways to prove Intent: What has to be intended?
    i. Purpose of causing required consequences (Specific Intent)

    ii. Knowledge of substantial certainty knowing the consequences will result (General Intent)

    • iii. Transferred Intent: Force used by… (jamming door open results in injuring a person).
    • a) Intend a forcible tort 
    • b) Forcible tort resulted
    • c) Direct
    • d) Immediate
  31. To establish a prima facie case for assault, the following elements must be proved:
    1) An act by D creating a reasonable apprehension in P of immediate harmful or offensive contact to P's person;

    • 2) Intent on the part of D to bring about in P apprehension of immediate harmful or offensive contact with P's person; and

    3) Causation - P's apprehension must have been legally caused by D's act or something set in motion

    • Damages not required
    • Transferred intent applies
  32. Construction of Apprehension (Assault)
    The apprehension of harmful or offensive contact must be reasonable applying a reasonable person test. 

    Apprehension is not the same as fear or intimidation. Apprehension here means expectation.

    P must have been aware of the threat from D's act.

    Knowledge of D's identity not required.

    D's apparent ability to act is sufficient.

    Overt act required. Words may negate an assault.

    Apprehension must be of immediate harmful or offensive contact.
  33. To establish a prima facie case for false imprisonment, the following elements must be proved:
    1) An act or omission to act on the part of D that confines or restrains P to a bounded area. 

    2) Intent on the part of D to confine or restraint P to a bounded area; and

    3) Causation. 
  34. Sufficient Methods of Confinement or Restraint (False Imprisonment)
    1) Physical Barriers

    • 2) Physical Force 
    •     a) directed at P or
    •     b) directed at a member of P's immediate     family or
    •     c) P's property

    3) Directed Threats of Force to P's Person or Property

    4) Indirect Threats of Force - acts or words that reasonably imply D will use force against P's person, property, or immediate family

    5) Failure to Provide Means of Escape - D has an affirmative duty to take steps to dismiss P

    • 6) Invalid Use of Legal Authority 
    •   a) false arrests
    •   b) Shoplifting detentions are privileged
    •   c) Insufficient Forms of confinement or              restraint
    •   d) No need to resist
    •   e) time of confinement is immaterial
    •   f) awareness of imprisonment except when        P is injured by the confinement
    •   g) For an area to be bounded P's freedom         of movement in all directions must be           limited
    •   h) P's confinement must have been legally         caused by D's act or something set in             motion
    •   
    • Transferred Intent Applies
    • Damages Required
  35. Intent/Causation Requirements in Bystander Cases (IIED)
    P must show:

    1) P was present when injury occurred to the other person;

    2) P was a close relative of the injured person; and

    3) D knew that P was present and a close relative of the injured person
  36. Physical Invasion of P's Land (Trespass to Land)
    • 1) There must be a physical invasion of P's land
    •     a) D's personal entry onto land not necessary i.e. flood, throw walks, chase 3rd person onto land

       b) Lawful right of entry expires

    • 2) Physical object must enter onto P's land
    • (if ultra hazardous activities are involved its a strict liability or nuisance)

    3) Trespass may occur on the surface, below the surface, or above the land.
  37. To establish a prima facie case of trespass to chattels, the following elements must be proved:
    1) An act of D that interferes with P's right of possession in the chattel;

    2) Intent to perform the act bringing about the interference with P's right of possession. 

    3) Causation; and

    4) Damages
  38. Acts by D (Trespass to Chattels)
    Any act of interference will suffice. There are 2 forms:

    1) Intermeddling is conduct by D that in some way serves to directly damage P's chattels

    2) Dispossession is conduct on D's part serving in some way to disposes P of his lawful right of possession.
  39. To establish a prima facie case for conversion, the following elements must be met:
    1) An act by D interfering with P's right of possession in the chattel that is serious enough in nature or consequence to warrant that D pay the full value of the chattel;

    2) Intent to perform the act bringing about the interference with P's right of possession; and

    3) Causation.
  40. Acts of Conversion
    1) Wrongful acquisition, i.e theft


    2) Wrongful transfer,  i.e. selling


    3) Wrongful detention, i.e. refusing to return to owner

    4) Substantially changing

    5) Severely damaging or destroying.

    6) Misusing the chattel.

What would you like to do?

Home > Flashcards > Print Preview