Torts_Final_Outline

Torts_Final_Outline - Transfer intent Doctrine 's wrongful...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–2. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Transfer intent Doctrine ’s wrongful intent is transferred from the intended victim to actual victim or from the intended tort to the committed tort. 1. Assault is the intentional infliction of reasonable apprehension of imminent harmful or offensive touching with apparent present ability to do so w/o c/p When has the apparent ability to commit a battery, this will suffice a reasonable apprehension Words alone are not sufficient but words coupled with conduct can make it an assault or can negate it. • π must be apprehensive and aware that she is about to become the victim of immediate battery. Little girl can create a reasonable apprehension of immediate battery 2. Battery is the intentional infliction of harmful or offensive touching w/o c/p It is offensive if π has not consented Touching can be direct or indirect: throwing a rocks at π , setting a trap for π , spitting at π , chain of events • π ’s person includes anything closely connected to π 3. False Imprisonment is the intentional and unlawful restraint by force or threat of force into a bounded area without reasonable means of escape Sufficient Acts of restraint: physical barriers, physical force, threat of force (psychological), failure to release, invalid legal authority Insufficient Acts of restraint: moral pressure, future threats, words alone Most jurisdictions require that π must be aware of the confinement however some jurisdictions allow recovery where the π was not aware of but was injured as the result of it Felling morally compelled or obligate to stay is not sufficient Keeping valuable property of a person can be regarded as a type of duress that qualifies for F/I (intent) F/I may occur when fails to live up to his promise if his promise is in the nature of providing means of way out 4. Intentional infliction of Emotional distress is the intentional or reckless infliction of severe emotional/mental distress by extreme and outrageous conduct. Under the Restatement, the requisite intent for IIED exists when the act is done for the purpose of causing the distress with knowledge that sever emotional distress is substantially certain to be produced by such conduct. Conduct is extreme and outrageous if it exceeds all bounds of decency that are tolerable by society Mere insulting words are not extreme and outrageous but if such a conducts are directed toward a certain type of π s, such as pregnant women then they are considered to be extreme and outrageous Racial remarks, embarrassment, humiliation, profanity toward pregnant woman, elderly person, and children are outrageous conduct. A conduct toward a supersensitive person is outrageous if the sensitivities are know to Common carriers or innkeepers are held to a higher standard of conduct and may be liable for gross insult IIED is the only intentional tort to person that requires damages (severe ED or disabling condition); Proof of
Background image of page 1

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

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Image of page 2
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Page1 / 21

Torts_Final_Outline - Transfer intent Doctrine 's wrongful...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 2. Sign up to view the full document.

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