TORT LAWTORT LAW

INTENTIONAL TORTSINTENTIONAL TORTS

What is a tort?What is a tort?

A A tort tort is a breach of a duty imposed by is a breach of a duty imposed by law which results in injury to another. law which results in injury to another. The law imposes a general duty on The law imposes a general duty on everyone to refrain from injuring others, everyone to refrain from injuring others, and to refrain from violating the rights of and to refrain from violating the rights of others. When a breach of this duty others. When a breach of this duty causes injury, the party causing the causes injury, the party causing the injury is held responsible, and is required injury is held responsible, and is required to compensate the injured party.to compensate the injured party.

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.

A throws a bomb into B’s office in A throws a bomb into B’s office in order to kill B. A knows that C is in order to kill B. A knows that C is in B’s office and that the bomb is B’s office and that the bomb is substantially certain to injure C, substantially certain to injure C, although A has no desire to do so. although A has no desire to do so. Has A committed an intentional tort Has A committed an intentional tort against C?against C?

Yes.Yes.

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

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

Cucinotti v. OrtmannCucinotti v. Ortmann

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

INTENTIONAL INFLICTION INTENTIONAL INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESSOF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS

Essential elements:Essential elements: An intentional actAn intentional act That amounts to extreme and That amounts to extreme and

outrageous conductoutrageous conduct Resulting in severe emotional distress Resulting in severe emotional distress

to anotherto another

State Rubbish Collectors State Rubbish Collectors Association v. SiliznoffAssociation v. Siliznoff

An association of rubbish collectors An association of rubbish collectors threatened to beat P and burn his threatened to beat P and burn his truck unless he paid money that he truck unless he paid money that he collected in a territory assigned to collected in a territory assigned to someone else. P became ill from someone else. P became ill from fright. He sued for damages and to fright. He sued for damages and to cancel promissory notes given in cancel promissory notes given in payment of the unlawful demand. payment of the unlawful demand. May he recover?May he recover?

Yes. The State Rubbish Collector’s Yes. The State Rubbish Collector’s Association was liable for intentional Association was liable for intentional infliction of emotional distress. The infliction of emotional distress. The promissory notes were cancelled.promissory notes were cancelled.