intentional battery

Question 1

Battery

Answer 1

Battery is the intentional causing of harmful or offensive contact

Question 2

intent for battery

Answer 2

For intent to commit a battery, D must either act with (a) the purpose
of bringing about harmful or offensive contact [specific intent] or (b) knowledge to a
substantial certainty their act(s) will bring about a harmful or offensive contact.

Question 3

single dual intent rule battery

Answer 3

Courts are split between the “single”
and “dual” intent approaches to battery. In those following “single
intent,” intent is satisfied even where D merely intended to bring about
bodily contact, irrespective of whether D intended the contact to be
harmful or offensive. By contrast, “dual intent” jurisdictions require both
that D intended to bring about bodily contact and intended the contact
be harmful or offensive.

Question 4

Harmful

Answer 4

Contact is “harmful” if it causes pain, disfigurement, or injury.

Question 5

offensive

Answer 5

Contact is “offensive” if it violates the plaintiff’s reasonable sense of personal dignity

Question 6

bodily contact battery

Answer 6

While bodily contact is satisfied by
direct, physical contact between persons, it is also satisfied when D’s acts directly or
indirectly caused another person or object to make bodily contact with P. This
extends to objects closely or intimately connected to P’s person, as consistent with
the dignitary interest battery protects. Moreover, the contact requirement is satisfied
even by D causing “intangible” objects to come into bodily contact with P where such
objects produce tangible or harmful effect

Question 7

Assault

Answer 7

intentional causing of apprehension of imminent harmful or offensive bodily contact

Question 8

intent for assault

Answer 8

intent to commit assault is satisfied where D either (a)
acted with the purpose of causing in P an apprehension of imminent harmful or
offensive contact [specific intent] or (b) knows to a substantial certainty their acts will
result in such apprehension [general intent

Question 9

imminent harmful or offensive contact test

Answer 9

Courts apply an
objective test—asking whether a reasonable person would have been put in
apprehension of imminent contact under the circumstances. Verbal threats (“mere
words”) are generally not enough. However, verbal threats accompanied by
objective manifestations (a.k.a. overt acts) demonstrating D’s “intent” to carry out the
threat of contact will satisfy the apprehension test so long as a reasonable person
under the circumstance would perceive the contact to be imminent under the
circumstances. On the other hand, a P’s subjective state of mind, including
diagnoses or other sensitivities particular to P, is not taken into account unless D
had prior knowledge suggesting P would be more (or less) likely to apprehend the
contact.

Question 10

h or c contact apprehension

Answer 10

unlike the battery claim, for purposes of the assault
theory of the case not only would the offensiveness aspect be satisfied but also
clearly the harmfulness aspect—that’s because assault focuses on the intended
“apprehension” of a contact rather than the contact D actually accomplished.

Question 11

iied

Answer 11

A D is liable for IIED if D intentionally or recklessly causes
severe emotional distress [4] by means of D’s extreme and outrageous conduct.

Question 12

intention or reckless iied

Answer 12

Intent for IIED is satisfied
where (a) D’s acts for the purpose of causing P emotional distress; (b) D knows
with substantial certainty their conduct will cause P emotional distress; and/or (c)
D recklessly disregards the high probability their conduct will cause P emotional
distress.

Question 13

extreme or outrageous conduct

Answer 13

Conduct is extreme and
outrageous when it goes beyond all possible bounds of decency such that the
conduct is intolerable in a civilized society.

Question 14

severe and emotional distress

Answer 14

A P suffers “severe”
emotional distress for purposes of IIED when P’s distress, at a minimum,
requires P to seek medical / mental health assistance for that distress. And
where P suffers subsequent physical injuries manifesting from the distress,
damages for those physical injuries are also compensable.

Question 15

trespass to chattels

Answer 15

A D is liable for trespass to chattel if D [1] intentionally [2] causes [3]
interference [4] with P’s use or possession of P’s chattel.

Question 16

intent for chattels/conversion

Answer 16

explain how he purposefully used it.
doesn’t matter if he didn’t know who it belonged to or if he thought it was his
good faith is no defense to intent

Question 17

conversion

Answer 17

a D is liable for
conversion if D [1] intentionally [2] causes [3] substantial interference [4] with P’s use or
possession of P’s chattel, the D must compensate P for the full market value of the
chattel at the time of the conversion.

Question 18

substantial interference reasons

Answer 18

1 extent domain or control
2 actors intent to reserve right over others roc
3 good faith
4 e/d resulting from interference
harm
5 inconvenience

Question 19

trespass to land

Answer 19

A D is liable for trespass to land if D [1] intentionally [2] causes [3] entry on
P’s land or real property [4] without permission. The reasonableness of the intrusion is irrelevant
to intentional trespass to land, and actual dispossession or damage is not a necessary element
of the cause of action. Nominal damages are recoverable regardless.

Question 20

entry to land

Answer 20

Entry onto the land of another
occurs when D’s person physically enters upon the land, causes another person or
instrumentality to do so, and even where D releases intangible agents (e.g., gases,
particles) if those intangible agents inflict tangible harms upon P’s land or property

Question 21

intent for land

Answer 21

Intent to commit trespass to land is satisfied where D intends (specific or
general intent) to cause a physical entry upon P’s land without permission.

Question 22

false imprisonment

Answer 22

is a volitional act done with the intent that causes plaintiff to be confined to a bounded area and the plaintiff is aware of the confinement or injured.

Question 23

intent for false imprisonment

Answer 23

The defendant must desire or be substantially certain that his actions will cause confinement or restraint of another within in a bounded area.

Question 24

bounded area

Answer 24

A “bounded area” is an area with fixed boundaries (does not have to be physical boundaries) in all directions, such that there is no reasonable means of escape to move outside the boundaries (the escape is generally not reasonable if it requires the plaintiff to be heroic, if it requires the plaintiff to endure excessive embarrassment or discomfort, if it requires the plaintiff to sustain injury or economic loss, OR if the plaintiff is unaware of the means of escape.)

Question 25

ways to confine

Answer 25

pyshcial barrier
force or threat
omission by defendant(boat captain)
unlawful arrest