Intentional Torts

Front 1

BATTERY

Back 1

An offensive or harmful bodily contact (or things so closely attached to the body as to be considered a part of it) done as an intentional act or brings about a result that the person should have been substantially certain would follow.
PROVE:
(1) D acted intentionally,
(2) P suffered a harm/offense which involved a touch to the body or something attached to the body that would this be offensive to an ordinary person under these circumstances i.e. violating a person’s reasonable sense of dignity.
- Battery can happen when a person is unconscious

Front 2

ASSAULT

Back 2

An intentional, unlawful, offer to touch the person of another in a rude or angry manner under such circumstances as to create in the mind of the party alleging the assault a well-founded fear of an imminent battery, coupled with the apparent present ability to effectuate the attempt if not prevented.
PROVE:
(1) D acted intentionally,
(2) reasonable apprehension (not necessarily fear) of immediate battery,
(3) ability of D to immediately carry out the battery

Front 3

FALSE IMPRISONMENT

Back 3

PROVE:
(1) The direct restraint of the physical liberty of another w/o obvious, reasonable means of escape
(2) w/o adequate legal justification.
- ASK: Did they enter voluntarily, if lured would they have gone there voluntarily otherwise?
- ASK: Did P attempt to leave or was P told (s)he could not leave?
- Words can suffice to create FI.
- FI can be based on an affirmative act, or a party’s failure to act when the part has a duty, capacity, and ability to act.

Front 4

INTENTIONAL INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS

Back 4

INTENTIONAL INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS.
1. The conduct must be intentional or reckless (knowledge intent)
2. The conduct must be extreme & outrageous. Only such conduct as exceeds all bounds permissible in society can give rise to an independent claim
a. doing it repeatedly may nudge a non-extreme to extreme
b. The position of authority should be considered
c. ASK: Does the D have specific knowledge of P’s vulnerability
d. No transferred intent in IIED. P must be present and D must know of P’s presence
BURDEN ON PLAINTIFF 
3. The wrongful conduct must cause the distress. The conduct complained of must be substantially certain to result in severe ED
4. The emotional distress must be severe. ASK: did they miss work, go to a doctor, have physical reaction? Mere insults or general abuse do not rise to the requisite level of outrageousness to allow for recovery

Front 5

TRESPASS TO LAND

Back 5

TRESPASS TO LAND. Every unauthorized and therefore unlawful entry into the close of another is a trespass. For every such entry against the will of the possessor, the law infers some damage (damages are inferred);
- A person entitled to exclusive possession of the property can be the P in trespass case.
- Putting any tangible item on the property is the same as you going on the property. Physical tangible trespasses are being considered. Light, smoke, etc will be covered under nuisance.
- Land in its legal significance has an indefinite extend upwards and downwards
- Once consent or license to a structure or chattel’s presence upon one’s land is effectively terminated, the presence may revert to trespass
- Tacit Permission. You have given permission ot the mailman, meter reader, and paper boy to go on your property.

- 3 CAUSES OF ACTIONS:
1. Ejectment: Someone is in possession of the land and you want them out of it.
2. Quiet Title Action: If you are in possession of the land and someone claims ownership
3. Forceable Entry and Detainer: When a renter is in the property and won’t leave.
- Condemnation (eminent domain) & Inverse condemnation (when an airport is built that effectively condemns the property and action can be taken for payment)

Front 6

TRESPASS TO CHATTELS.

Back 6

Restatement 218: One who w/o consensual or other privilege to do so, uses or otherwise intentionally intermeddles w/ a chattel which is in possession of another is liable for a trespass to such a person if
(a) the chattel is impaired as to it condition, quality, or value
(b) the possessor is deprived of the use of the chattel for a substantial time, or
(c) bodily harm is thereby caused to the possessor or harm is caused to some person or thing in which the possessor has legally protected interest.

- Unlike trespass to land, trespass to chattels does not entitle one to nominal damages. Some sort of damage must result from the interference b/c sufficient legal protection of the inviolability of possession of a chattel is found in the privilege to use reasonable force to maintain possession.
- Intentionally and substantially interfering with computer servers that have finite resources is a trespass. Compuserve Inc. v. Cyber Promo

Front 7

CONVERSION.

Back 7

Substantive tort theory which underlay the ancient common law form of action for trover. A P in trover alleged that he had lost a chattel which he rightfully possessed, and that the D had found it and converted it to his own use.
Restatement: An intentional exercise of dominion or control over a chattel which so seriously interferes with the right of another to control it that the actor may justly be required to pay the other the full value of the chattel.
- The most distinctive feature of conversion is its measure of damages – whole value, not diminished value as in trespass.
- Where the intermeddling falls short of the complete or very substantial deprivation of possessory rights in the property the tort committed is not conversion, but the lessor wrong of trespass to chattels.
- Can occur similar to trespass when license expires or they exceed your permission.
- Writ of Replevin – in conversion, the way you get the property back instead of receiving full payment
- Writ of Garnishment – in conversion, the way you get damages paid