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

25 Cards in this Set

  • Front
  • Back
Definition: Intentional unpriveleged harmful or offensive contact of another. Elements: 1) Intent to cause harmful or offensive contact or imenent apprehension of
2) Harmful or offensive contact occurs
Offensive contact?
Leihtman v. WLW
Contact that Offends a reasonable sense of personal dignity
(tabacco smoke case)
Vosburg v. Putney
Intent to harm not necesary(only intent to contact) if intent is unlawful the intent to commit the unlawful act must also be unlawful. Eggshell plaintiff rule, (kidkicks other kid in shin)
Garratt v. Dailey
Intent is satisfied if the person committing the act knows to a substantial certanty the result will occur (kid pulls chair, elderly woman falls)
Subjective Intent
D acts for the purpose of causing contact
Constructive Intent
D acts w/ knowledge to a substantial certainty that contact will occur
Fisher v. Carrousel Motor Hotel
A battery is committed when contact occurs with something closely associated with ones person. (D grabbed plate P was holding, harm was offensive)
1) Intent to put the other in imminent apprehension of harmful or offensive contact
2) The other is thereby put in imminent apprehension
Read v. Coker
an assault is committed when there is a threat of violence exhibiting an intention to assault with a present ability to carry out the threat (D asked p to leave, men rolled up their sleaves ect and said they would break his neck if he did not leave)
Beach v. Hancock
Unloaded gun. Apparent present ability to carry out threat is assault. P did not know gun was not loaded, but was reasonably put in imminent apprehension, it did not matter the gun was not actually loaded.
False Imprisonment
1) Intent to confine a person 2) the act results in confinement 3) the other is conscious of confinement or is harmed by it
Whitakker v. Sanford
for false imprisonment, It is not necesary that D apply physical force to P, only requires that P is physically restrained. (Religous Sect refused boat to woman trying to leave palatial yacht)
Rougeaue v. Firestone
(security guard theft inquiry case, P was allowed to leave when he said he was sick) you must test your confinement, no confinement if you seemingly consent
Coblyn v. Kennedy
(Old man thought to have been shoplifting). There were no reasonable grounds to restrain, therefore there was false imprisonment. The man was restrained of his personal liberty by fear of personal difficulty. Any demonstration of physical power which can only be avoided by submission, constitutes false imprisonment
Shopkeeper's privelege
Reasonable grounds for detainment, in a reasonable manner, and only for a reasonable amount of time.
Sindle v. New York Transit
a person falsey detained is not relieved of his duty of reasonable care when extracating himself from the unlawful detention. (14 yr ld boy jumped/fell out of school bus window)
Intentional Infliction of Emtotional Distress
1) extreme & outrageous conduct 2) Intent to inflict ED or Reckless should have known ED would result 3) P suffers EED 4) ED is objectivley reasonable
State Rubbish Collectors v. Siliznoff
a cause of action is established when it is shown that one in the absence of privilege intentionally subjects another to the mental suffering incident to serious threats are made under such circumstances as to constitute a technical assault
Sams v. Eccles
D's conduct was extreme & outrageous and he Should have known ED would result (D made numerous sexual advances to P a married woman and exposed himself to her)
Taylor v. Metzger
(i) a jury could find that a single racial comment directed against a subordinate employee by a supervisor could constitute the tort of intentional infliction of emotional distress. (Supervisor called employee Jungle Bunny.)
Jones v. Clinton
To establish a claim of IIED a p must prove that the conduct complained of was extreme and outrageous and utterly intolerable in a civilized society & P must suffer ED (President made sexual advances to P but stopped when requested, and there was no ED.)
Butterfield v. Forrester
(pole accross the road, D riding "violently") One person being in fault will not excuse the other from using ordinary care for himself. (case allows for recovery even if p was also negligent)
Davies v. Mann
(ass in the road) Defendant was bound to go along the road at a pace likely to prevent mischief.
The holding in this case has developed into the doctrine of last clear chance, where if the defendant had the opportunity to avoid the accident after the opportunity was no longer available to the plaintiff, the defendant has a duty to do so or else he will bear the loss.
Meistrich v. Casino Arena Attractions, Inc.
The term assumption of risk has 2 meanings. In its primary sense, it is a denial of breach of duty by the D, and so the burden of proof is on the P. In its secondary sense, it is a defense by a negligent D against p's recovery based on contributory negligence, and the burden of proof is on the D.. If the jury found that an ordinarily prudent person would have undertaken the same risks, then there is no contributory negligence
Duty to Rescue
is relianced based:
can be generated by begining to rescue, inn keepers, summer camps ect. common carriers