Study your flashcards anywhere!

Download the official Cram app for free >

  • Shuffle
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Alphabetize
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Front First
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Both Sides
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Read
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off

How to study your flashcards.

Right/Left arrow keys: Navigate between flashcards.right arrow keyleft arrow key

Up/Down arrow keys: Flip the card between the front and back.down keyup key

H key: Show hint (3rd side).h key

A key: Read text to speech.a key


Play button


Play button




Click to flip

37 Cards in this Set

  • Front
  • Back
What are the elements of battery?
1. Intent to cause contact/imminent apprehension of contact
2. Harmful or offensive contact occurs.
Vosburg v. Putney-
Intended contact/not intended consequences- liability is extended to all injuries resulting directly from the wrongful act, whether or not they could have been foreseen
Garratt v. Dailey
Substaintial Certainty- act must be done for the purpose of causing a contact or with knowledge on the part of the actor that such contact or apprehension is substantially certain to occur.
Definition Harmful Contact-
A contact is harmful if it causes a loss or detriment (not a mere change), bodily harm= any physical impairment of another’s body, of physical pain or illness
Definition Offensive Contract
A bodily contact is offensive if it offends a reasonable sense of personal dignity
Intent Checklist
1. Intended contact not intended consquences- Vosburg v. Putney
2. Substantial Certainty- Garratt v. Dailey
3. Transferred Intent
Fisher v. Carrousel Motor Head
Actual physical contact is not necessary to constitute a contact- so long as there is contact with clothing or an object closely identified with the body
Leichtman v. WLW Jacor Communications, Inc
a person can commit battery merely by causing offensive contact (cigarette)
Definition privileged
an act is privileged if the actor owes no legal duty to refrain from such contact
What are the privileges as defenses to battery?
1. Consent
2. Self-defense
3. Defense of Others
4. Defense of Property
5. Necessity
Definition Consent (battery)
Willingness for contact to occur even if it is not communicated to the d.
O’Brien v. Cunard Steamship Co
Consent or lack of consent is measured by the overt acts and manifestations of the p.
Barton v. Bee Line, Inc
Public policy would not be served by allowing an underaged girl to sue for lack of consent to a sexual act if she willingly engages
Bang v. Charles T. Miller Hospital
where a physician or surgeon can ascertain in advance of an operation alternative situations and no immediate emergency exists, a patient should be informed of the alternative possibilities and given a chance to decide before the doctor proceeds with the operation
Kennedy v. Parrott
when an internal operation is indicated, a surgeon must perform, and it is his duty to perform, such operation as good surgery demands, even when it means an extension of the operation further than was originally contemplated, and for doing so he is not to be held for damages as for an unauthorized operation.- p submitted herself to care of d
Consent in an Emergency:
No liability if:
(i) emergency makes it necessary or apparently necessary, in order to prevent harm to the other, to act before there is an opportunity to obtain consent from the other or one empowered to consent for him, an
(ii) That the actor has no reason to believe that the other, if he had the opportunity to consent, would decline.
Hackbart v. Cincinnati Bengals
trial court found implied consent in professional football players
Policy reasons for Tort Law
Contact Case Checklist
1. Garratt v. Dailey
2. Fischer v. Carrousel Motor Head
3. Leichtman v. WLW Jacor Communications, Inc
Consent Checklist
(a)Express Consent
(b)Manifest Acts- objective (O’Brien v. Cunard Steamship Co.)
(c)Custom Implies Consent(Hackbart v. Cincinnati Bengals)
(d)Doctor- inferred consent/must be informed (Kennedy, Bang)
(f)Fraud or Duress
(g)(Grown-up Good Mind) Capacity to consent: must be legally capable of consent; minors and mental incapacity to consent.
Consent Case Checklist
(a) Barton v. Bee Line, Inc
(b) Bang v. Charles T. Miller Hospital
(c) Kennedy v. Parrott
(d) Hackbart v. Cincinnati Bengals
(e) O’Brien v. Cunard Steamship Co
Self Defense by Force not Threatening Death or Seriously Bodily Harm
to defend himself against unprivileged harmful or offensive contact or other bodily harm which he reasonably believes that another is about to inflict intentionally upon him (even if could retreat, comply with command, give up right/privilege)
Extent of Force Permissible in Self-Defense
No privilege to use force greater that is intended to or likely to cause a bodily harm greater than that which the actor reasonably believes to be necessary for his protection.
When does the privilege to use force threatening death or serious bodily harm not apply?
1. Can retreat safely in any other place but his dwelling place (or if it’s the dwelling of the other as well), 2. Relinquish the right/privilege other than the right to stay in dwelling place.
In what situations does the privilege to use force threatening death or serious bodily harm still apply?
1. can retreat if attacked in his dwelling place, 2. permit the other to intrude upon him or dispose him of his dwelling place, or 3. abandon an attempt to effect a lawful arrest.
When is a person privileged to use force threatening serious bodily harm or death?
when he reasonably believes that the other is about to inflict upon him an intentional contact or bodily harm and he is thereby put in peril of death or serious bodily harm which can only be prevented by immediate use of such force.
When is an actor privileged to use force not threatening death or serious bodily harm?
if he reasonably believes that the other is about to intentionally inflict unprivileged harmful or offensive contact upon him.
Even if: can retreat, give up privilege/right, comply with command (no duty to comply and other no duty to enforce)
Courvoissier v. Raymond
A defense of self-defense requires that the d acted honestly in using force and his fears were reasonable under the circumstances; also must prove reasonableness of the means made use of.
Defense of Third Person
An intervener is entitled to use reasonable force to protect a third party as long as the intervener reasonably believes that the intervention is necessary and that the third party would be privileged to use self-defense if able to do so, even if the party to be protected would not be privileged to defend himself.
An actor is privileged to use reasonable force, not intended or likely to cause death or serious bodily harm to prevent or terminate another’s intrusion upon the actor’s land or chattels if:
(i) The intrusion is not privileged and
(ii) The actor reasonably believes that the intrusion can be prevented or terminated only by the force used, and
(iii) The actor has first requested the other to desist and the other has disregarded the request, or the actor reasonably believes that a request will be useless or that substantial harm will be done before it can be made.
The intentional infliction upon the other of a harmful or offensive contact or other bodily harms by a means which is intended or likely to cause death or serious bodily harm, for the purposes or preventing or terminating the other’s intrusion upon the actor’s possession of land or chattels, is privileged if
but only if, the actor reasonably believed that the intruder, unless expelled or excluded, is likely to cause death or serious bodily harm to the actor a third person whom the actor is privileged to protect.
Katko v. Briney
a mere trespass against property other than a dwelling is not a sufficient justification to authorize the use of a deadly weapon by the owner in its defense, if death results in such a case it will be murder, though the case is actually necessary to prevent the trespass.
(d) Restatement 197 recognizes a necessity-based privilege to enter the of another in order to avoid serious harm to one’s person, land or chattels, or to those of a third person. This privilege is coupled land with an obligation on the part of the entrant for whatever harm he has caused.
Case Checklist for Necessity
1. (a) Ploof v. Putnam
2. (b) Mouse’s Case
3. (c) Vincent v. Lake Erie Transporation Company
Ploof v. Putnam
One may sacrifice the personal property of another in order to save his life or the lives of his fellows
Mouse’s Case
everyone ought to bear his loss in order to safeguard a person’s life.
Vincent v. Lake Erie Transporation Company
a person can prefer property interest, but has to pay, to ensure that person makes decision of which would be more costly- justification for trespass (necessity)- but have to pay.