Torts

Front 1

7 INTENTIONAL TORTS

Back 1

1.ASSAULT
2.BATTERY
3.CONVERSION
4.FALSE IMPRISONMENT
5.INTENTIONAL INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS
6. TRESPASS TO LAND
7. TRESPASS TO CHATTELS

Front 2

ASSAULT

Back 2

To establish this claim, [plaintiff] must prove all of
the following:

[1. That [defendant] acted, intending to cause harmful
[or offensive] contact;
2. That [plaintiff] reasonably believed that [he/she]
was about to be touched in a harmful [or an offensive]
manner;]
[or]
[1. That [defendant] threatened to touch [plaintiff] in a
harmful [or an offensive] manner;
2. That it reasonably appeared to [plaintiff] that
[defendant] was about to carry out the threat;]
3. That [plaintiff] did not consent to [defendant]’s conduct;
4. That [plaintiff] was harmed; and
5. That [defendant]’s conduct was a substantial factor
in causing [plaintiff]’s harm.

Front 3

BATTERY

Back 3

To establish this claim, [plaintiff] must prove all
of the following:


1. That [defendant] [touched [plaintiff]] [or]
[caused [plaintiff] to be touched] with the intent to
harm or offend [him/her];

2. That [plaintiff] did not consent to the touching;
and

3. That [plaintiff] was harmed [or offended] by [defendant]’s conduct; [and]

[4. That a reasonable person in [plaintiff]’s situation
would have been offended by the touching.]

Front 4

CONVERSION

Back 4

1. That [plaintiff] [owned/possessed/had a right to
possess] a [personal property];
2. That [defendant] intentionally [insert one or more
of the following:]
[took possession of the [personal property] for
a significant period of time;] [or]
[prevented [plaintiff] from having access to the
[personal property] for a significant period of
time;] [or]
[destroyed the [personal property];]
3. That [plaintiff] did not consent;
4. That [plaintiff] was harmed; and
5. That [defendant]’s conduct was a substantial factor
in causing [plaintiff]’s harm.

Front 5

FALSE IMPRISONMENT

Back 5

To establish this claim,
[plaintiff] must prove all of the following:



1. That [defendant] intentionally deprived [name of
plaintiff] of [his/her] freedom of movement by use of
[physical barriers/force/threats of force/menace/fraud/
deceit/unreasonable duress]; [and]
2. That [plaintiff] did not consent;
3. That [plaintiff] was [actually] harmed; and
4. That [defendant]’s conduct was a substantial factor
in causing [plaintiff]’s harm.

Front 6

INTENTIONAL INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS

Back 6

1. That [defendant]’s conduct was outrageous;
2. [That [defendant] intended to cause [name of
plaintiff] emotional distress;]
[or]
[That [defendant] acted with reckless disregard of
the probability that [plaintiff] would suffer
emotional distress, knowing that [plaintiff] was
present when the conduct occurred;]
3. That [plaintiff] suffered severe emotional distress;
and
4. That [defendant]’s conduct was a substantial factor
in causing [plaintiff]’s severe emotional distress.

Front 7

TRESPASS TO PROPERTY

Back 7

A VOLITIONAL AND UNPRIVILEGED ENTRY ONTO THE LAND OF ANOTHER.

PRIVELEGE CAN BE GIVEN THROUGH TIME, SPACE, AND ALSO BY PURPOSE. PRIVELEGE CAN BE TERMINATED BASED ON THESE ELEMENTS.

A MISTAKEN BELIEF THAT ONE HAS CONSENT OR THAT THE PROPERTY IS ONES OWN IS NOT A DEFENSE.

Front 8

TRESPASS TO CHATTELS

Back 8

1. That [plaintiff] [owned/possessed/had a right to
possess] a [personal property];
2. That [defendant] intentionally [insert one or more
of the following:]
[interfered with [plaintiff]’s use or possession of
the [personal property];]
[or]
[damaged the [personal property];]
3. That [plaintiff] did not consent;
4. That [plaintiff] was harmed; and
5. That [defendant]’s conduct was a substantial factor
in causing [plaintiff]’s harm.

Front 9

9. PRIVILEGES:
(DEFENSES TO INTENTIONAL TORTS)

Back 9

1. self defense
2. consent
3. Authority of law
4. recovery of property

5. necessity
6. defense of property

7. defense of others
8. justification
9. discipline

Front 10

CONSENT

Back 10

A plaintiff may express consent by words or acts that are
reasonably understood by another person as consent.

A plaintiff may also express consent by silence or inaction
if a reasonable person would understand that the silence
or inaction intended to indicate consent.

Front 11

SELF - DEFENSE

Back 11

To succeed, [defendant] must
prove both of the following:


1. That [defendant] reasonably believed that [plaintiff] was going to harm [him/her]; and

2. That [defendant] used only the amount of force
that was reasonably necessary to protect [himself/herself]

Front 12

DEFENSE OF OTHERS

Back 12

To succeed, [defendant] must
prove both of the following:


1. That [defendant] reasonably believed that [plaintiff]
was going to harm [ANOTHER PERSON]; and

2. That [defendant] used only the amount of force
that was reasonably necessary to protect
[ANOTHER PERSON]

Front 13

DEFENSE OF PROPERTY

Back 13

THE PRIVILEGE TO DEFEND PROPERTY IS LIMITED TO THE USE OF FORCE REASONABLY NECESSARY TO THE SITUATION AS IT APPEARS TO THE DEFENDANT.

WHAT IS REASONABLE WILL BE DECIDED BY A JURY.

Front 14

RECOVERY OF PROPERTY

Back 14

(FALSE IMPRISONMENT DEFENSE):

IF ONE REASONABLY BELIEVES THAT
ANOTHER HAS UNLAWFULLY TAKEN
GOODS HELD FOR SALE, THEN THEY
HAVE THE PRIVILEGE TO DETAIN THAT
PERSON FOR A REASONABLE INVESTIGATION
OF THE FACTS.

(BATTERY DEFENSE):

REASONABLE FORCE CAN BE USED TO HOLD
ANOTHER WHO HAS TAKEN PROPERTY BY
UNLAWFUL MEANS.

Front 15

NECESSITY

Back 15

PUBLIC NECESSITY:
IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY LEGISLATION ON THE SUBJECT, A PUBLIC OFFICER WILL NOT BE ACCOUNTABLE IN TORT FOR ACTS COMMITTED IN PROTECTING THE GREATER PUBLIC FROM IMINENT HARM.

PRIVATE NECESSITY:
THE PRIVATE PARTY THAT CLAIMS NECESSITY WILL STILL BE LIABLE FOR DAMAGE CAUSED BY THEIR ACTION.