Torts I-ME - Michael R. Ertel Torts Professor Tamanaha I....

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

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Michael R. Ertel Torts Professor Tamanaha I. Intentional Torts Intention : Must be intent to bring about some sort of physical or mental effect upon another person. Two possible ways to argue for intent : (Can get one without the other.) (1) An act done for the purpose of causing the injury. (2) Knowledge that contact or apprehension of contact is substantially certain to be produced. **No intent to harm is required.** **No need to intend the actual result.** Mistaken identity does not matter for intent. Transferred Intent : Three different ways. (1) Try a particular tort on A but particular tort was done to B instead. (2) Try a particular tort on A but a different tort is done to A . (3) Try a particular tort on A but a different tort is done to B . Eggshell Skull Rule : In intentional torts, the tortfeasor is responsible for all the consequences that follow, whether they are foreseeable or not. In negligence, the tortfeasor is only responsible for foreseeable consequences. 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
Michael R. Ertel Torts Professor Tamanaha A. Battery: (1) An actor is subject to liability to another person for Battery if: (a) “Intent Element”: He acts intending to cause (i) harmful or (ii) offensive contact with the person of the other (or a 3 rd person ‘transferred intent’), or an imminent apprehension of such contact and (b) “Contact Element”: A harmful contact with the person of the other directly or indirectly results Act by the D (a) Act is an external manifestation of the actor’s will, i.e., the actor’s volition. (b) Unconscious acts, such as an epileptic seizure, are not considered volitional(willful). (c) Reflex actions, such as reaching out to grab something when you are falling, is volitional. Intent (a) D must have done the act with the intent to inflict harmful or offensive touching on P. (This is a subjective test!) (b) Motives are immaterial, only thing pertinent is intent. (c) An honest mistake does not matter. (when hunting wolves, you actually shoot a person’s dog) Harmful or offensive touching (Reasonable Person Standard) (a) D’s act must have resulted in the infliction of a harmful or offensive touching of P’s person, or something closely associated with P’s person (personal effects). - This includes knocking P’s hat off of his head, or grabbing a plate from P’s hand. ( Fisher ) (b) There must be actual physical contact, coming close is not good enough for battery. (c) Offensive touching may include any touching which would violate a reasonable person’s sense of dignity. (This excludes hypersensitive P’s, unless D knows of hypersensitivity.) (d) P need not know of touching right away in order to have battery. - D kisses P while P is asleep. If P learns of contact at a latter time, you may have battery. -
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 02/18/2008 for the course LAW 1010 taught by Professor Cavanaugh during the Fall '00 term at St. Johns Duplicate.

Page1 / 29

Torts I-ME - Michael R. Ertel Torts Professor Tamanaha 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