Powers Law Firm PA Home
Torts - Outline Part 1
Download the PDF version of this outline
Intentional Torts- Way to remember: BAFFITTC
- Battery, Assault, False Imprisonment, IIED, Trespass to Land, Trespass to Chattels, Conversion
- Intent
- Two types:
- General = substantial certainty a result will occur
- Specific = D desires to bring about a certain result w purpose
- Transfer of Intent
- Mistake doesn’t negate intent
- intent to hit A but actually hit B = still liable for the damage caused to B
- Torts it applies to:
- Battery
- Assault
- False imprisonment
- If you intend to cause one of these torts but actually cause another = intent transfers
- Not a consideration of negligence
- Situations it applies to:
- Person to person
- Tort to tort
- Doesn’t apply to property
- Two types:
Types of Intentional Torts
- Battery
- Intentional infliction of harmful or offensive bodily contact
- Elements:
- Intentional
- Purpose of causing the contact OR the substantial certainty a consequence will occur
- Harmful or offensive bodily contact
- Pain = harmful contact
- Offensiveness = state of mind; damaging to a reasonable sense of dignity
- Motive irrelevant for offensiveness
- Would the RPP find this offensive?
- Doesn’t have to be body-to-body contact
- Can be contact through an object
- Can occur if the D comes in contact w something intimately associated w P’s person
- Fisher v. Carousel = Case where black man at hotel conference had plate snatched + slur
- Causation
- Intentional
- P doesn’t have to prove any damage for battery
- Can be awarded nominal damages
- Some small amount for winning case
- Can be awarded nominal damages
- Not necessary for P to be actually aware of the contact at the time it occurs
- Mistake does not negate intent here (leads to problem of transferred intent)
- Contact beyond level consented to
- Can occur when D goes beyond level of contact P consented
- Sporting event
- Medical procedure
- Can occur when D goes beyond level of contact P consented
- Damages can include recovery for mental distress caused by the battery
- No such thing as a recklessly caused battery*
- Crowded world test:
- In a crowded world, we have to accept that we will bump into each other
- Cannot isolate self in a crowded world
- Looking for something demonstrating action was reasonable (objective question)
- Warren v. Rosen = created crowded world test
- Potential defenses/privileges:
- Consent
- Self Defense
- Assault
- Intentional causing of an apprehension of harmful or offensive contact
- Elements
- Intentional
- Purpose to cause apprehension of contact OR
- Substantial certainty that apprehension of contact will result
- If act fails, intent to cause contact can fall under this too
- Apprehension of harmful or offensive contact
- Cannot be limited to fear alone; must be apprehension (perception or anticipation of harmful/offensive contact)
- Must be imminent
- Threats for the future = not assault
- Has to appear to P that D is capable of causing harm
- Causation
- Intentional
- Words alone not sufficient to constitute assault
- Can’t recover if apprehension of harm to other people
- P must have apprehension of harm to themselves
- Not necessary for actions to be made in hostility
- Can’t recover if apprehension of harm to other people
- P must be aware of the threatened contact
- Can be awarded nominal damages
- Mostly applies to mental distress
- False Imprisonment
- Elements:
- Intent
- Restraint or confinement to a bounded area
- Can be accomplished through force, threat of imminent force, duress, or asserted legal authority
- Can’t be for threats of future actions
- Can be accomplished through force, threat of imminent force, duress, or asserted legal authority
- Causation
- Awareness or injury
- P must be aware that they are confined while they are being confined
- Can recover for any mental distress that is the product of it
- No actual damages needed
- Means of escape NOT reasonable if:
- Not apparent
- P doesn’t know it exists
- If escape is left open w/o physical/safety consequences = not FI
- Not just causing confinement but keeping in confinement
- Moral persuasion case:
- Confined out of sense of obligation
- Confined in words but not in threat
- NOT sufficient for FI
- Situations it can apply to:
- Moving vehicles
- Actionable confinement can be as large as a state
- Retention of property can sometimes qualify
- Means of causing FI:
- Accompanied by force, threat of imminent force, duress, or asserted legal authority (beyond physical barriers)
- Threats of future action = NOT FI
- False arrest = FI when done by police
- Requires grounds for arrest
- Enright v. Groves
- Accompanied by force, threat of imminent force, duress, or asserted legal authority (beyond physical barriers)
- Potential Defenses/Privileges:
- Consent
- Shopkeeper’s privilege
- Privilege of arrest
- Elements:
- Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress
- Elements:
- Intent
- D desires to cause P emotional distress
- D knows w substantial certainty emotional distress will occur
- D recklessly disregards high probability of emotional distress
- Only intentional tort where recklessness will serve as a replacement for intent
- Extreme and outrageous conduct
- “Beyond all possible bounds of decency”
- Using reasonable person test to measure
- Problem for jury to determine
- Slocum v. Food Fair = failure to prove this aspect
- Severe mental distress
- Distress severe enough to seek medical aid (double check)
- Big difference between mental distress and severe mental distress
- Causation
- Intent
- Transferred intent in IIED:
- Immediate family exception where it applies:
- D directs conduct towards immediate family of P
- P is present
- P’s presence is known to D
- Taylor v. Valluga
- Immediate family exception where it applies:
- Elements:
- Trespass to Land
- Elements:
- Intent
- Makes entry actionable
- Entry upon land
- Mistake not an excuse
- Air space applies too
- Can be privileged
- Can be a person or a physical object
- Possessed by another
- Don’t have to know land is possessed by another
- P doesn’t have to own the land (only possess)
- Causation
- Intent
- When it occurs
- D intentionally enters P’s land w/o permission
- D remains on P’s land w/o right to be there
- D puts object on P’s land (or refuses to remove) w/o permission
- Damage not an element
- Property doesn’t have to be fenced
- Potential Defenses:
- Consent
- Elements:
- Trespass to Chattels
- Explained:
- Can be more temporary;
- Elements
- Intent
- Purpose w substantial certainty; doesn’t have to have to know its someone else’s property
- Interference w personal property
- Loss of possession
- Possessed by another
- May not be the owner of the property; can just be the one possessing it
- Causation
- Damages
- Physical harm or substantial deprivation or dispossession
- Dispossession = stealing; taking property permanently
- Deprivation = taking property more temporarily
- P must prove that property was physically harmed/damaged (however slight or severe)
- Physical harm or substantial deprivation or dispossession
- Intent
- Remedies for Trespass to Chattel:
- P would get the damages for the value of the item AND the item back
- Mistake is no defense here
- Explained:
- Conversion:
- Substantial physical harm or dispossession
- Theft = automatic grounds for conversion
- Elements:
- Intent
- Interference w property
- Possession by another
- Causation
- Substantial physical harm or dispossession
