{[ promptMessage ]}

Bookmark it

{[ promptMessage ]}

Torts Outline (2) - TORTS OUTLINE I Intentional torts...

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

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
TORTS OUTLINE I. Intentional torts : battery, assault, trespass, conversion 1. Intent: Refers to the consequences of the act (RST §2). a. No insanity defense ( McGuire ) i. Issue : whose can more cheaply control the insane person: family or caretaker? (or: insurance vs. litigation) 2. Battery : touching without consent a. Thing hit can be article as well as body ( De Longchamps ) b. Thing hitting can be object as well as body (e.g. spit, Alcorn ) c. Issues : i. Does intent apply to harm (RST §18) or only to the act that causes harm ( Vosburg , Garratt, White )? ii. Damages: in case of Vosburg , do we want whole life of P under normal circumstances, adjusted to reflect risk of injury due to medical condition blowing up by itself, or adjusted to reflect risk of medical condition blowing up period (including likelihood that someone else kicks it). 1. Damages can be adjusted to reflect benefits in good-faith cases ( Mohr , where surgeon operated on different ear than agreed upon). 2. Issue : “eggshell P doctrine”; take your P as you find him. 3. Assault : a. Elements (RST §21): i. intent to either harm or put in apprehension of harm, AND ii. apprehension of harm 1. RST §21 comment b: fear d/n equal apprehension b. Example: woman brandishing a gun that she knew to be unloaded guilty of assault b/c others did not ( Allen ). 4. Trespass : intentional entry onto the real property of another a. intent applies to the act of entry, not to the act of trespass ( Dougherty , Perry ) b. no damages required ( Dougherty , Blondell ), except with trespass to chattels. c. entry can be by any tangible object, such as a rock, your foot, or even floride gas that falls to the ground ( Martin v. Reynolds Metals ). Cannot be intangible ( Van Wyk ). 5. Conversion : exercising domain over someone else’s property a. intent applies to taking the object, not to conversion itself ( Poggi ) i. however: good-faith converters cannot be liable for punitive damages, ( Maye , where liable for value of gold minus labor to extract it). Nor can they be forcibly resisted in breach of the peace (see self-defense / recapture of chattels, below). Therefore can simply give the item back. 1. Note: this distinction d/n exist in trespass, so damages for good-faith conversion equivalent to any trespass b. Conversion vs. trespass to chattels: w/ conversion liable for whole value of item; w/ trespass liable for loss of temporary possession or damage only.
Background image of page 1

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

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
c. Conversion applies even to innocent subsequent purchasers ( Moore ). d. Issues : i. Medical cases (e.g. Moore ): does an organ become abandoned after surgery? Even if the consent was fraudulently obtained? Courts have said no. ii. Intangible objects: some courts (e.g. Kremen ) say conversion applies. Sykes says this “pushes the envelope.” 6. False Imprisonment a. must be an enclosed area ( Bird v. Jones ) b. area of being confined can’t be much bigger than a considerable town (e.g. not “the rest of the habitable world”) (RST) c. restraint can be based on implicit threat of force – need not be physical ( Coblyn ) 7. Intentional infliction of emotional distress a. Three elements: i. extreme and outrageous conduct ii.
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.

{[ snackBarMessage ]}