Chapter 2. Intentional torts.
Intentional torts are wrongful acts committed with the intent
to cause harm or with knowledge that harm is likely to result.
These torts are distinguished from negligence and strict
liability offenses, where liability is based on a failure
to exercise reasonable care or on the nature of the activity,
rather than on the intent to cause harm.
The primary intentional torts include battery, assault, false
imprisonment, intentional infliction of emotional
distress, trespass to land, trespass to chattels, and
conversion battery. Battery is a fundamental concept
in tort law that addresses intentional physical contact,
which is harmful or offensive and occurs without the victim's
consent. It is one of the most basic and
clearly defined torts, reflecting society's interest in
protecting individuals from unwanted physical intrusions.
Below is a detailed exploration of the key elements, examples,
and defenses associated with battery.
Definition of Battery Battery is defined as the intentional and
harmful or offensive physical contact with another person
without their consent. It is important to note that the
contact does not need to result in significant injury.
It is sufficient that the contact is either harmful or
offensive to the victim. The primary components that must
be proven for a successful claim of battery include intent,
contact and the nature of the contact.
Harmful or offensive. Key elements of battery Intent.
Nature of intent. The defendant must have intended
to make contact with the plaintiff.
This intent does not necessarily mean the defendant intended to
harm the plaintiff. It is sufficient if they
intended to cause the contact that resulted in harm or
offense. Substantial certainty.
Alternatively, the defendant may be liable if they acted with
substantial certainty that contact would occur even if they
did not specifically intend the harmful outcome.
Transferred Intent. Under the doctrine of
transferred intent, if the defendant intended to commit a
battery against one person but unintentionally harmed another,
the intent is transferred and the defendant can be held liable
for the unintended battery. Example if a person throws a
rock intending to hit person A, but misses and hits person B
instead, the intent to hit person A transfers to person B
and the defendant can be held liable for battery against
person B. Contact Direct and indirect
Contact Battery requires some form of physical contact with
the plaintiff. This contact can be direct, such
as a punch or slap, or indirect, such as when the defendant
causes an object to hit the plaintiff.
Objects associated with the person.
Contact also includes touching something closely associated
with the plaintiff's person, such as knocking a hat off their
head or grabbing an object. They are holding.
Immediate contact. For the contact to qualify as
battery, it must occur in a context where the contact
directly or immediately affects the plaintiff's body.
Example, If someone forcibly removes another person's
eyeglasses from their face. This action constitutes battery
as it involves immediate contact with something closely
associated with the plaintiff. Harmful or offensive.
Harmful contact This type of contact results in physical
injury or pain to the plaintiff. It is typically straightforward,
involving actions like hitting, pushing, or any form of physical
violence. Offensive Contact Even if the
contact does not 'cause physical harm, it can still be better if
it offends a reasonable person's sense of personal dignity.
Offensive contact includes actions that are insulting,
degrading, or otherwise unwelcome.
Reasonable person standard The determination of what
constitutes harmful or offensive contact is generally based on
the perspective of a reasonable person under similar
circumstances. Example.
Spitting on someone while not causing physical injury is
considered offensive contact because it violates a person's
sense of dignity and is deeply disrespectful.
Examples of battery. To further illustrate the
concept of battery, consider the following examples, each
demonstrating how the key elements of intent, contact, and
harmful or offensive nature apply in different contexts.
Physical altercation Scenario. During an argument, one person
punches another in the face. Analysis This is a clear case of
battery as it involves intentional physical contact
that is both harmful and offensive.
Unconsented medical procedure Scenario A doctor performs a
surgical procedure on a patient without obtaining their informed
consent. Analysis.
The lack of consent in the intentional physical contact
through surgery make this a case of battery, even if the
procedure was medically beneficial.
Spitting incident Scenario. An individual spits on another
person during a heated confrontation.
Analysis Although there may be no physical injury, spitting is
offensive and constitutes battery as it offends a
reasonable person's sense of dignity.
Object contact Scenario. Someone snatches a phone out of
another person's hand in anger. Analysis Taking the phone
involves immediate physical contact with something closely
associated with the person, which can be deemed offensive,
thus constituting battery defenses to battery While
battery encompasses a broad range of conduct, there are
several defenses that a defendant might raise to avoid
or mitigate liability. Common defenses include consent.
Definition Consent occurs when the plaintiff agrees to the
contact, either explicitly or implicitly.
Scope of consent Consent can be given for specific activities,
such as contact sports where physical contact is expected and
accepted. Limitations The scope of consent
must be clear, and exceeding the agreed upon scope can still
result in liability for battery. For example, consent to a
medical procedure does not extend to a different, unrelated
procedure without additional consent.
Example In a boxing match, each participant consents to physical
contact as part of the sport. However, if one boxer bites the
other's ear off, this action likely exceeds the scope of the
consent given for normal boxing conduct.
Self-defense Definition self-defense allows a person to
use reasonable force to protect themselves from an imminent
threat of harm. Reasonableness The force used
must be proportionate to the threat faced.
Excessive force or retaliation beyond what is necessary to
defend oneself can invalidate this defense.
Immediacy self-defense is only valid if the threat is immediate
and ongoing preemptive or retaliatory actions do not
qualify. Example if someone is physically
attacked and responds with a proportional level of force to
fend off the attacker, they can claim self-defense as a defense
to any battery claim arising from their response.
Defense of Others Definition Similar to self-defense, this
defense applies when a defendant uses reasonable force to protect
another person from harm. Reasonableness The actions taken
must be necessary and proportional to the threat
against the third party. Immediacy As with self-defense,
the threat to the third party must be imminent.
Example. If a person sees a friend being
assaulted and intervenes by using reasonable force to stop
the attacker, they can claim defense of others as a
justification for their actions. Defense of property Definition.
A person may use reasonable force to protect their property
from being damaged or unlawfully taken.
Limitations. The force used must be
proportionate and not intended to cause serious harm.
Deadly force is generally not justified unless the threat to
property also involves a threat to personal safety.
Scope. The defense of property is more
limited compared to self-defense and typically does not justify
actions that cause significant injury.
Example, a store owner who gently pushes a shoplifter out
of their store to prevent theft is likely within their rights
under the defense of property. However, using a weapon to deter
the theft would likely exceed reasonable force.
Battery is a core concept in tort law that focuses on the
protection of individuals from unwanted and harmful or
offensive physical contact. Understanding the elements of
intent, contact, and the nature of the contact is crucial in
identifying battery. While battery claims are
relatively straightforward, they are also nuanced by various
defenses, such as consent and self-defense, which balance the
protection of personal rights with reasonable actions in
certain circumstances. By delineating the boundaries of
permissible physical interactions, battery laws play
a significant role in maintaining personal security
and societal order. Assault Assault is a tort that
protects individuals from the fear or apprehension of imminent
harmful or offensive contact. Unlike battery, assault does not
require actual physical contact. Instead, it focuses on the
victims perception of a threat and the immediate fear that such
contact will occur. This distinction underscores the
importance of mental and emotional security in addition
to physical safety. Below, we delve into the
definition, key elements, examples, and defenses
associated with assault. Definition of assault Assault is
defined as an intentional act that creates a reasonable
apprehension in another person of imminent, harmful or
offensive contact. This apprehension is essentially
a fear or expectation that such contact will occur almost
immediately. The essence of assault lies in
the mental impact on the plaintiff, the anticipation of
potential harm rather than the harm itself.
Key Elements of Assault To establish a claim for assault,
the plaintiff must demonstrate 3 critical elements Intent,
reasonable apprehension and imminence Intent Nature of
intent The defendant must have acted with the intention to
cause the plaintiff to apprehend imminent, harmful or offensive
contact. It is not necessary for the
defendant to intend to follow through with the contact.
It is sufficient if they intended to create a reasonable
belief in the plaintiff's mind that such contact was about to
occur. Substantial certainty.
Similar to battery. If the defendant acts with
substantial certainty that their actions will cause the plaintiff
to fear imminent contact, this element of intent is satisfied.
Transferred intent. The doctrine of transferred
intent also applies to assault. If the defendant intends to
assault one person but causes another to apprehend imminent
contact, the intent transfers to the unintended victim.
Example, if a person swings a baseball bat intending to scare
person A, but person B is standing nearby and fears being
hit, the intent to create apprehension in person transfers
to person B. Reasonable apprehension.
Reasonableness. The apprehension experienced by
the plaintiff must be reasonable.
This means that a reasonable person in the same situation
would have similarly feared imminent harmful or offensive
contact. Subjective Experience.
While the standard is objective, the plaintiff's actual
perception is also considered. They must have actually felt the
apprehension, even if they did not express it outwardly.
Perception versus reality. The apprehension must be based
on the plaintiff's perception of the threat.
The actual ability of the defendant to carry out the
threat is less important than the plaintiff's reasonable
belief that they could. Example, if someone points an
unloaded gun at another person who believes the gun is loaded,
the victims apprehension is reasonable even if they are not
physically harmed. Imminence.
Immediate threat. The threat of contact must be
immediate and present. A future or conditional threat
does not constitute assault because it does not create the
same immediate fear of contact. No delay.
The defendant's actions must suggest that the harmful or
offensive contact is about to occur without any significant
delay. Distinguishing from fear.
Mere fear of a general possibility of harm is not
sufficient. The fear must be of imminent and
impending contact. Example.
If someone raises their fist and threatens to punch another
person right now, this creates an imminent threat of contact.
Conversely, a threat to punch someone tomorrow does not meet
the requirement for imminence. Examples of Assault To
illustrate the application of the elements of assault,
consider the following scenarios.
Threat with Raised Fist Scenario During an argument, one person
raises their fist as if to strike another person and shouts
I'm going to punch you. Analysis The raised fist
combined with the verbal threat creates a reasonable
apprehension of imminent harmful contact.
The threat is immediate and clear, fulfilling the elements
of assault. Brandishing a weapon Scenario An
individual pulls out a knife and waves it menacingly at someone
standing nearby saying, I could stab you right now.
Analysis The act of brandishing the weapon and the statement
create a reasonable and immediate fear of being stabbed.
The plaintiff's apprehension is both reasonable and imminent,
constituting an assault. Aggressive advancing scenario.
A person aggressively advances towards another, making
threatening gestures and saying you're going to regret this
while within striking distance. Analysis, the combination of
threatening words, gestures, and close proximity creates a
reasonable apprehension of imminent harm.
The immediacy of the threat makes it an assault fake punch
scenario. Someone swings their fist at
another person but stops just short of making contact,
intending to scare them. Analysis The plaintiff perceives
the swing as an imminent threat of being punched, creating
reasonable apprehension even though actual contact does not
occur. This fulfills the criteria for
assault Defenses to assault. As with battery, defendants can
raise several defenses to an assault claim to mitigate or
eliminate liability. Common defenses include consent,
self-defense, and defense of others.
Consent Definition. If the plaintiff consents to the
actions that create the apprehension of contact, the
defendant may avoid liability for assault.
Explicit or implied Consent can be either explicit, clearly
stated, or implied, inferred from the plaintiff's behavior or
the context. For instance, consent is often
implied in context like sports, where physical interactions are
expected. Limitations.
The scope of consent is crucial. Actions beyond the scope of what
was consented to can still constitute assault.
Example In a consensual sparring match, a participant cannot
claim assault if they reasonably expected the possibility of
being fainted or bluffed as part of the exercise. self-defense
definition A defendant may claim self-defense if they reasonably
believe that they were about to be harmed and used a threat of
force to prevent it. Reasonableness.
The response must be proportionate to the threat
faced. Excessive or unnecessary threats
do not qualify as self-defense. Immediacy.
The threat of harm must be imminent for self-defense to be
a valid defense against assault. Example, if someone is about to
be struck by an aggressor and they threaten to hit back as a
means of protection, they can claim self-defense if the threat
was immediate and proportionate to the risk.
Defense of others. Definition This defense applies
when the defendant uses a threat of force to protect another
person from imminent harm. Reasonableness and
proportionality The actions must be necessary and appropriate to
the threat against the third party.
Immediacy The perceived threat to the other person must be
immediate. Example, If a person sees their
friend being threatened with a punch and they raise their own
fist to deter the aggressor, they may claim defense of others
provided their actions were proportional and timely.
Assault is a critical aspect of tort law that protects
individuals from the fear and apprehension of imminent harmful
or offensive contact. It focuses on the victims
perception and mental state rather than on actual physical
contact. The key elements intent,
reasonable apprehension, and imminence define the boundaries
of assault and help differentiate it from other
torts like battery. Various defenses, such as
consent and self-defense, allow for a balanced approach in
situations where the threat of contact might be justified or
consensual. Through its detailed provisions
and defenses, assault law upholds personal security and
dignity, playing a vital role in maintaining societal order and
protecting individual rights. False Imprisonment.
False imprisonment is a tort that protects individuals from
being unlawfully confined or restrained against their will.
It ensures that people have the right to move freely without
unjustified interference. The tort of false imprisonment
does not require physical restraint.
The confinement can also be through threats, barriers, or
other means that restrict a person's freedom of movement.
Here, we explore the definition, key elements, examples, and
defenses associated with false imprisonment.
Definition of false imprisonment False imprisonment occurs when a
person intentionally confines another person within fixed
boundaries, without lawful justification and without the
confined person's consent. The essence of false
imprisonment lies in the restriction of the victim's
freedom of movement. This restriction can be physical
or psychological, provided that the victim reasonably believes
they cannot leave the bounded area.
Key elements of false imprisonment.
To establish a claim for false imprisonment, the plaintiff must
demonstrate 4 essential elements, Intent, confinement,
lack of consent and awareness or harm.
Intent. Nature of intent.
The defendant must have intended to confine the plaintiff or
acted with substantial certainty that their actions would result
in confinement. It is not necessary for the
defendant to intend to harm the plaintiff.
The intent to confine is sufficient.
Substantial certainty. If the defendant's actions are
almost certain to result in confinement, this satisfies the
intent requirement. Transferred Intent.
The doctrine of transferred intent applies here as well.
If the defendant intended to confine one person but
inadvertently confined another, the intent transfers to the
actual victim. Example If a store manager locks
the store believing a specific person inside has committed
theft, but inadvertently locks in an innocent customer, the
intent to confine transfers to the innocent customer.
Confinement Bounded area The plaintiff must be confined
within a bounded area with no reasonable means of escape.
This area can be large or small, but it must have definite
boundaries that restrict the plaintiff's movement.
Means of confinement Confinement can be achieved through physical
barriers like locked doors, physical force, threats of
force, or by other means that effectively prevent the
plaintiff from leaving. Reasonableness of escape The
means of escape must be reasonable.
If the only escape route poses a risk of harm or is undignified,
like climbing out of a high window, it is not considered a
reasonable means of escape. Example if someone is locked in
a room with no way out, this constitutes confinement.
Conversely, if the room has an open window that the person can
safely and reasonably climb out of, this may not constitute
false imprisonment. Lack of consent No voluntary
agreement. The confinement must occur
without the plaintiffs consent. If the plaintiff agrees to the
confinement, either explicitly or implicitly, then false
imprisonment has not occurred. Scope of consent If consent is
given for a specific purpose or duration, confinement beyond
that scope can still be false. Imprisonment.
Example. If a person agrees to stay in a
room for questioning by security, but is then kept there
after asking to leave, the extended confinement may
constitute false imprisonment Awareness or harm plaintiffs
awareness. The plaintiff must be aware of
the confinement at the time it occurs.
If the plaintiff is unaware, for example, they are unconscious or
asleep, they must have suffered some harm as a result of the
confinement. Harm.
If the plaintiff is not aware of the confinement at the time,
they must show that they suffered harm as a result of
being confined, such as physical injury, emotional distress, or
other consequential damages. Example If a person is locked in
a room while unconscious and wakes up later to find
themselves confined, they must show that they suffered harm,
for example, missed important appointments, experienced
significant distress to claim false imprisonment.
Examples of false imprisonment To illustrate the application of
the elements of false imprisonment, consider the
following scenarios. Unlawful detention by security
scenario A security guard detains a shopper in a store on
suspicion of theft without reasonable grounds and refuses
to let them leave. Analysis The security guard
intentionally confined the shopper within the store without
lawful justification and without the shopper's consent.
The shopper's reasonable belief that they could not leave
constitutes confinement. Locked room without consent
Scenario An individual locks another person in a room without
their consent and prevents them from leaving.
Analysis The individual's intentional act of locking the
door confines the person within a bounded area without their
consent and with no reasonable means of escape.
Threats leading to Confinement Scenario A person tells another,
if you leave this room, I will harm you, causing the latter to
stay in the room out of fear. Analysis The threat of harm
creates a psychological barrier, effectively confining the person
without physical restraint. The person's reasonable
apprehension of imminent harm fulfills the confinement
element. False Arrest Scenario A police
officer arrests an individual without probable cause or a
warrant and the individual is taken to the police station and
held there. Analysis The police officers
actions intentionally confined the individual within a bounded
area, the police station, without lawful justification and
without the individual's consent.
Defenses to False Imprisonment Defendants can raise several
defenses to a false imprisonment claim to avoid or mitigate
liability. Common defenses include lawful
authority, consent, and necessity.
Lawful authority definition. If the defendant had lawful
authority to confine the plaintiff, this serves as a
defense to false imprisonment. This often applies to law
enforcement officers acting within the scope of their
duties. Scope of authority The authority
must be lawful and correctly exercised.
For example, a lawful arrest requires probable cause and in
many cases, a warrant. Example, if a police officer
arrests someone based on a valid warrant, this confinement is
lawful and does not constitute false imprisonment.
Example A store security guard detains a shoplifter based on
reasonable grounds and follows legal protocols for detention.
Consent Definition. If the plaintiff consented to
the confinement, the defendant is not liable for false
imprisonment. Scope and validity of consent.
Consent must be given freely and voluntarily without coercion or
duress. The scope of consent also
matters. Confinement beyond the agreed
terms can still be considered false imprisonment.
Example. A person agrees to stay in a
waiting room while their companion meets with a security
officer. This consent negates a false
imprisonment claim. Example.
An individual agrees to be locked in a room as part of an
escape room game. Their voluntary participation
constitutes consent to the temporary confinement.
Necessity Definition. The defense of necessity applies
when the defendant confines the plaintiff to prevent a greater
harm. The actions must be reasonable
and proportional to the threat. Eminence and proportionality.
The threat must be immediate, and the confinement must be
necessary to avert that threat. Example A teacher can find the
student in a classroom during a lockdown drill to ensure their
safety. This confinement, while
restrictive, is necessary to protect the student from
potential harm. Example During a natural
disaster, a person prevents others from leaving a safe area
to ensure their safety. The necessity to protect lives
justifies the temporary confinement.
False imprisonment is a significant tort in protecting
personal freedom and autonomy, ensuring that individuals are
not unlawfully confined or restrained.
The key elements intent, confinement, lack of consent,
and awareness or harm define the boundaries of this tort and help
distinguish it from other wrongful acts.
Various defenses, such as lawful authority, consent, and
necessity provide a balanced approach to determining
liability and recognizing justified confinements.
Through its provisions, false imprisonment law upholds the
right to personal liberty and contributes to maintaining a
just and orderly society. Intentional infliction of
emotional distress. IED Definition.
Intentional infliction of emotional distress involves
extreme and outrageous conduct by the defendant that
intentionally or recklessly causes severe emotional distress
to the plaintiff. The elements of Eid include
extreme and outrageous conduct. The defendant's actions must be
beyond the bounds of decency and intolerable in a civilized
society. Intent or recklessness The
defendant must have intended to cause emotional distress or
acted with reckless disregard for the likelihood of causing
distress. Causation The defendant's
conduct must be the direct cause of the plaintiff's emotional
distress. Severe emotional distress The
plaintiff must suffer severe emotional distress, which can be
manifested through physical symptoms or significant
psychological impact. Examples A person repeatedly
harasses and threatens another individual, causing them to
suffer anxiety and fear. An employer subjects an employee
to continuous and severe verbal abuse, leading to depression and
emotional trauma. Defenses to Eid Defenses to an
Eid claim may include lack of intent or recklessness, the
conduct not being deemed extreme and outrageous by societal
standards, or the plaintiff not experiencing severe emotional
distress. Intentional Infliction of
Emotional Distress IED Intentional Infliction of
Emotional distress IED is a tort that addresses severe emotional
trauma caused by outrageous and extreme conduct.
Unlike other torts that typically involve physical harm,
EVE focuses on emotional and psychological harm, emphasizing
the need to protect individuals from conduct that goes beyond
the bounds of decency. Below, we explore the
definition, key elements, examples, and defenses
associated with Eid. Definition of Eid Intentional
infliction of emotional distress involves conduct by the
defendant that is so extreme and outrageous that it causes severe
emotional distress to the plaintiff.
The defendant must act intentionally or recklessly, and
the plaintiff's distress must be severe enough to warrant legal
intervention. Key elements of Eid To establish
a claim for Eid, the plaintiff must prove 4 critical elements.
Extreme and outrageous conduct. Intent or recklessness.
Causation and severe emotional distress.
Extreme and outrageous conduct. Nature of conduct The
defendant's behavior must be so extreme and outrageous that it
goes beyond all possible bounds of decency, and it is regarded
as atrocious and utterly intolerable in a civilized
society. Context and relationship Courts
consider the context and the relationship between the parties
when determining if conduct is extreme and outrageous.
Conduct that may not be outrageous in one context might
be in another, especially if there is a power imbalance, such
as between an employer and employee.
Objective standard. The standard is objective,
meaning the conduct must be extreme and outrageous to a
reasonable person In similar circumstances.
Example A creditor repeatedly calls a debtor late at night
using threatening and abusive language, knowing the debtor is
recovering from a serious illness.
This conduct can be considered extreme and outrageous.
Intent or recklessness. Intent.
The defendant must have intended to cause emotional distress.
This can be established if the defendant's primary purpose was
to inflict emotional harm. Recklessness.
Alternatively, the defendant may be liable if they acted with
reckless disregard for the likelihood of causing emotional
distress. Recklessness involves a
conscious disregard of a high risk of causing severe emotional
harm.