Case Overview for Torts
Wagner v. Utah (2005) - Lady that got attacked by a mentally retarded man at K-mart. It was a
battery. As long as a person deliberately makes a contact, & that contact was harmful (doesn’t
have to intend the harmful outcome).
White v. Muniz (2000) – Elderly women determined to be mentally incapacitated, struck her
caregiver on the jaw and ordered her out of the room as the caregiver was trying to change her
for the contract to be
Nelson v. Carroll (1999) – Carroll into a club with a gun, demanding his money back from
Nelson. He didn’t have the money so Carroll hit him on the side of the head, demanded it again,
then came to hit him again, but the gun went off, shooting Nelson in the stomach. There was a
battery because he set in motion the battery to be occurred.
Fisher v. Carrousel Motor Hotel (1967) – Black guy was invited to a meeting, and he went to eat
at a nearby buffet. While in line, the manager stormed out and snatched his plate away, yelling
that they don’t serve people like him. It was considered a battery because there was “contact.” As
long as it’s with clothing or an object closely identified with the body.
McCracken v. Sloan (1979) – Person allergic to tobacco, told his manager at the post office that
he was allergic. Manager continued to smoke in his office stating “there is no law against
smoking, so I’m going to smoke.” Not a battery because no “glass cage.”
Leichtman v. WLW Jacor (1994) – An antismoking activist was invited to a radio show, and the
host there, repeatedly puffed smock into the activist’s face. That act was considered intent, and
the smoke particles are considered the contact. Battery.
Coblyn v. Kennedy’s, Inc. (1971) – Old man walks into Kennedy’s (the store), and tries on
clothes. He purchases clothing, and as he walks out, he takes a ascot out of his coat and puts it
on. An employee grasped his arm and told him to follow him, as another 8-10 employee’s
watched. He agreed. This is considered false imprisonment. However, there is a “shopkeeper’s
privilege” to grant employees authority to detain a customer to investigate ownership of the
property, for a reasonable amount of time, and manner.
Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress
State Rubbish Collections v. Siliznoff (1952) – A father and son-in-law had a rubbish collection
business, and a customer did not like their current rubbish collector. So after the term was up, he
gave it to the Father and son, which violated the association policy. The association then harassed
the son-in-law with threats of ruining their business and beating him up, if he did not do things. It
was considered an
, because, defendant intentionally subjected another to mental distress
w/o intending bodily harm, can still be liable for resulting bodily harm if he should have foreseen