CASE EXAMPLE White v Muniz Nurse in retirement home sued for battery when

Case example white v muniz nurse in retirement home

This preview shows page 2 - 5 out of 12 pages.

CASE EXAMPLE: White v Muniz (Nurse in retirement home sued for battery when patient punched her, no intent to harm) 4. Transferred Intent Doctrine : D acting with intent to commit an assault and who causes harmful or offensive contact to the plaintiff has committed a battery iv. Damages 1. Proof of actual damages is not required. Punitive damages may be recovered where D acted with malice a. CASE EXAMPLE: A.R.B v Elkin (Ds were P’s children, sued for emotional damages from years of sexual abuse) 2. Emotional Distress Damages can be awarded if P suffers emotional distress as a result of any trespassory tort, even without physical harm. P is entitled to recover as a separate element of damages, but ED cannot be a stand-alone suit (must be as a result of trespassory tort) v. Liability 1. Extended Liability Principle : The D who commits an intentional tort, at least if it involves conscious wrongdoing, is liable for all the damages caused, not merely those intended or foreseeable 2. Child Liability a. General Rule: Children may be held liable for torts they commit as long as the injured plaintiff can prove the required elements, including intent
Image of page 2
3 b. Parental Liability: Not vicariously liable for the torts of their children simply by virtue of their being parents Assault i. Elements 1. Act creating a reasonable apprehension in plaintiff of immediate or harmful contact to plaintiff’s person 2. Intent on the part of the D to bring about in P apprehension of immediate or harmful contact with P’s person 3. Causation ii. Construction of Apprehension 1. Requirement of Reasonableness – Courts will apply the Reasonable Person Test a. Fear/Intimidation – Apprehension is not the same as intimidation b. P’s Knowledge of Act is Required c. Knowledge of D’s Identity Not Required d. D’s Apparent Ability to Act is Sufficient 2. Effect of Words a. Overt Act Required – Words alone, however violent, generally do not constitute as assault b. Conditional Threat is Sufficient FALSE IMPRISONMENT Torts to Property 1) Trespass to Land i. Elements 1. Intent a. Refers only to intentional interference, no strict liability b. Negligence – if D negligently enters P’s land, generally treated as a tort of negligence, not trespass c. Effect of Mistake – If D had intent to commit a physical contact with P’s land, D will have the requisite intent for trespass even if his decision to make the contact is the result of a mistake. Thus D’s mistake about legal title or consent won’t block liability i. Exmp: D wants to get to his land and walks across P’s land, which he mistakenly believes is his or no one else’s, it is a trespass 2. Remains on P’s land without right to be there, even if entered rightfully 3. Puts an object on P’s land without permission 2) Trespass to Chattels
Image of page 3
4 Any intentional interference with a person’s use or possession of a chattel. D only has to pay damages, not the full value of the property.
Image of page 4
Image of page 5

You've reached the end of your free preview.

Want to read all 12 pages?

  • Spring '08
  • Hogshead
  • Tort Law

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture