myoutline - Torts Christina Whitman Fall 2006 I....

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–3. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Torts Christina Whitman Fall 2006 I. Intentional, Dignitary Torts (Intent, Act, Result): Battery A. Prima Facie Case 1. A acts 2. intending to cause a) harmful contact with P 1, 2 , or b) contact with P that is offensive 3 ; and 3. A’s act causes such contact. B. Act 1. Rarely at issue 2. Only problem if outside influence causes A to perform a “non-act” (i.e. B takes A’s hand and hits C with it.) C. “Intending” to cause 1. Sometimes straightforward – Either a purpose to case the contact or substantial certainty that such contact will occur. a) If you think it will happen or want it to happen, you’re liable. 2. Mostly inferences will have to be drawn to infer intent 3. Intending contact is usually the only necessary requirement, not actually intending for a particular harm to occur. You will be liable for all damage that is caused. (Eggshell Scull rule) 4 4. Knowledge that the touching will occur is sufficient but not necessary to make the prima facie case (if you think it probably won’t, but then does, you can still be liable). 5. Offensive: must be against prevailing standards of acceptable touchings, offends a reasonable sense of personal dignity. 6. If someone has a known phobia and you specifically target them, even if it wouldn’t be offensive to others, it can still be battery. D. Causes contact 1. Must involve “touching” 2. Does not have to be direct a) E.g. if you throw a dart at someone, that is “touching”. b) E.g. particulate nature of cigarette smoke allowed to be “touching”. 5 3. Can also be touching of something the plaintiff is in contact with. a) Doctrine of extended personality 4. Plaintiff does not have to be aware of the touching at the time. E. Even if the damages are small (in cases of offensive contact, mostly) winning a case shows that you have been wronged. II. Intentional Dignitary Torts (Intent, Act, Result): Assault A. Prima Facie Case – “Attempted Battery” 1. A acts 2. intending to cause in P the apprehension of 6 : a) an imminent harmful contact with P, or b) an imminent contact with P that is offensive; and 1
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
3. A’s act causes P reasonably to apprehend this imminent contact. B. Apprehension 1. Only apprehension, not fear a) Damages depend on fear aspect however. C. Ability to actually commit the act necessary to make the apprehension reasonable . 1. “Words alone” – Mere words do not suffice. Must be coupled with other acts or circumstances that lead to apprehension. a) Previous behavior that makes P believe the words will actually come to bear can be taken into account. 2. Must be just and reasonable grounds for the fear ( Brooker ) D. Conditional threats may negate the assault (if you weren’t old… vs. if you don’t sleep with me…) E. Must be IMMINENT danger (I’m going to come back and… not assault) 7,8 F. P must have apprehension that he himself will be hurt, not a third party. III. Intentional Dignitary Torts (Intent, Act, Result):
Background image of page 2
Image of page 3
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

This note was uploaded on 04/11/2008 for the course LAW crim taught by Professor Idk during the Spring '08 term at University of Michigan.

Page1 / 21

myoutline - Torts Christina Whitman Fall 2006 I....

This preview shows document pages 1 - 3. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online