Sanutti ILA Module 4

Tort Outline
A. Tort is.
a. An act or omission that gives rise to harm or injury to another and
amounts to a civil wrong which courts impose liability.
b. Tort law denotes the legal responsibilities and/or duties that
persons owe one another.
c. Tort laws provide victims of conduct breaching those duties with
redress.
2. Purpose of Torts
a. Compensating the injuries Parties.
b. Shifting the cost of the harm to the person that caused the
injury.
1. Comparative Default -both defendant and plaintiff share
the blame. (McDonald’s Case)
c. Deter the actions from occurring again.
1. Punitive Damage Default (Johnny Depp awarded10
million against Amber for being intentionally
malicious).
3. Types of Torts
a. Intentional Tort (IT) is a wrongful act in which harm or injury is
caused to another. (Purposeful-deliberate-not voluntarily)
Fault+intent
b. Negligence- results from the failure to take sufficient care in
fulfilling a duty owed. Fault
c. Strict Liability is a legal doctrine that holds a party responsible
for their actions or products, without the plaintiff having to prove
negligence or fault. No-Fault
d. Breach of Torts (Plaintiff must prove until Prima Facie).
a. that the defendant breached a duty that he owed to the
plaintiff.
b. that this breach was a proximate cause of the plaintiff's
injury; and
c. that the plaintiff suffered legally compensable damages.
e. Anatomy of A Tort (Steps)
a. Harm or Injury (physical, emotional, business, and property)
b. Investigation and Research
1. What Happen?
2. The extent of Injuries.
3. Witnesses’ interviews, and reports.
4. Experts ((Forensic, Autopsy, Ballistic, etc.…)
5. Potential Legal Claims
c. Complaint
1. Starts the lawsuit.
i. Filed in the courts.
ii. Served on the defendant.
2. Substance of the complaint
i. Asserts the facts of the case.
ii. Asserts torts that arise from the facts.
iii. Seeks remedies, i.e., damages, etc.…
 Sanutti ILA Module 4

d. Answer or Motion to Dismiss the Complaint

1. Admits or denies the facts in the complaint.
2. Asserts defenses.
3. Motion to dismiss.
i. Ask to dismiss all charges.
ii. Ask to dismiss some of the charges.
e. Discovery
1. Obtain more information from parties and non-parties.
2. Variety of devices-requesting documents
i. Depositions
ii. Request for documents
3. Helps develops trial evidence.
f. Summary Judgement
1. Asks the court to rule against the other party or not let the
case go to trial.
2. No genuine dispute of material fact for the jury to decide.
3. Entitled to the judgment as a matter of law.
g. Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR)
1. Can be given at any point during the process.
2. Sometimes happens before a complaint is filed.
3. Alternative way of resolving the dispute w/o going to trial.
h. Trial
1. Judge (determines the legal decisions).
2. Jury (determines the factual decisions).
3. Evidence
4. Motions
5. Jury Instructions
6. Verdict-Decisions
i. Appeal ( if something is not done correctly at trial-this, is not a
retrial)
1. Uphold decisions of the trial and judge rulings in the case.
2. Reverse a decision and/or decisions from the trial.
3. Send back for a new trial.
NOTE to MYSELF " Prima Facie "  case is the meeting of the elements. The
DA has proven his elements. At this point, BURDEN shifts to DEFENDANT.

B. INTENTIONAL TORT (IT) is a wrongful act in which harm or injury is

caused to another. (Fault+intent)

1. Elements of an Intentional Tort (IT)

a. Intent is defined as being active with purpose or having
knowledge that the act in question can cause injury or harm to
another person. (Desire the consequences).
i. Substantial certainty is when the defendant is certain her act
will cause the damage. Requires that the person allegedly committing
battery knew with substantial certainty that the action would cause harm.
Note not to be confused with reckless conduct. Ex. A drives at a
very excessive speed, risking a collision. Intentional conduct requires
 Sanutti ILA Module 4

showing that the defendant desires or knows with substantial certainty

the tortious result will occur as a result of her conduct.

ii. Transfer Intent Rule is applied to these intentional torts. If the

defendant intends any of the IT but her acts, instead of or in addition,
result in any of the other IT, the defendant is liable, even though she did
not intend the other tort. Ex. A intends to hit B, but B ducks and A hits C
in the face instead. A is liable for battery, not only does the intent to
commit one tort to satisfy the intent requirement for the other tort but the
intent to commit a tort against one victim can be transferred to any other
victim.
iii. The Substantial Certainty Test: Requires that the person
allegedly committing battery knew with substantial certainty that the
action would cause harm.

iv. Mistaken Doctrine if the defendant acts which would constitute

a tort, it is no defense that the defendant mistakes, even reasonably, the
identity of the property or person he acts upon or believes incorrectly
there is a privilege. Ex. A enters B’s land believing reasonably it is A’s
land, A is liable to B for trespass. So long as the defendant intends to
enter the property, the fact that she mistook the identity of the property or
circumstances is irrelevant.
b. Acting requires the person to perform an act that results in
harm or injury to another. Thinking about or planning to perform
an act does not constitute.
c. Causation BUT FOR… the defendant’s actions or " cause"  the
injuries or damage would not have occurred.
2. Types of Intentional Torts
a. Battery
b. Assault
c. False Imprisonment
d. Trespass to Chattel
e. Trespass to Land

2A. Battery is a voluntary act, intended to cause harmful or offensive

contact to another person and it causes such contact. A defendant must
desire the contact to occur or know to a substantial certainty that their
actions will cause the contact to occur. “Paul and Dre”
1. Elements of Battery
a.) Contact Volitional Act
b). Intention. Intention to cause harmful or offensive
harm. Cole v Turner
c). Consent. Non-censual contact.
d. Causation. The act causes the contact. But for…
2. Rule Statements for Battery (IRAC)
a. voluntary act is an act if not done out of reflex
or coercion.
b. intent is defined as having the conscious
purpose of causing a particular result or voluntarily acting when a
particular result is substantially certain to occur.
 Sanutti ILA Module 4

c. substantial certainty is the assumption of intent even if

the actor did not intend the result, but knew with substantial certainty the
effect would occur as a result of his action.
d. cause contact. But for the actions of the defendant….
i. Issue Did/Is… liable for the tort of battery?
ii. Application The analysis becomes whether the
defendant desired the harmful or offensive contact or knew with a
substantial certainty it would occur.
iii. Conclusion In this present case, all three
elements of the tort of the battery have been met. Therefore, Dre
committed the act of battery.

2B. Assault occurs when the defendant acts intentionally to cause the
victim reasonable apprehension of immediate harmful or offensive contact.
The act was intended to cause apprehension of harmful offensive contact,
and the act indeed caused apprehension in the victim that harmful or
offensive contact would occur.

1. Elements of Assault
a. INTENTION: Intending to cause another the apprehension of
imminent harmful or offensive contact (desire with
substantially certain apprehensions of immediate harmful or
offensive contact will occur).

i. Intent is satisfied if ∂ either; Desires to cause the

apprehension; or
ii. Knows with substantial certainty that the
apprehension will occur.

b. APPREHENSION OF IMMEDIATE HARM CONTACT

Plaintiff must (1) actually and (2) reasonably apprehend an
imminent (i) harmful, or (ii) offensive contact.

c. CAUSATION: The act reasonably causes this apprehension

in another. But for the defendant’s actions.
i. Reasonableness Standard Test test RST
(objective) Ask whether the decisions made were legitimate
and designed to remedy a certain issue under the
circumstances at that time.
. ii. Restatement Second of Torts, section 21 provides:
(1) An actor is subject to liability to another for assault if
a) he acts intending to cause a harmful or offensive
contact with the person of the other or a third
person, or an imminent apprehension of such a
contact, and (b) the other is thereby put in such
imminent apprehension. (2) An action that is not
done with the intention stated in Subsection (1, a)
does not make the actor liable to the other for an
apprehension caused thereby although the act
 Sanutti ILA Module 4

involves an unreasonable risk of causing it and,

therefore, would be negligent or reckless if the risk
threatened bodily harm.
2. Rule statement for IRAC
1. That defendant acted, intending to cause harmful
(or offensive) contact, and
2 That the plaintiff reasonably believed. that (he/she
was about to be touched in a harmful (or an offensive) manner
or
1. The (defendant) threatened to touch (plaintiff) in a
harmful (or an offensive manner).
. 2. That it reasonably appeared to (the plaintiff’)’s that
(defendant)’s was about to carry out the threat,
3. That the plaintiff did not consent to the defendant’s
conduct, and
4. The defendant’s conduct was a substantial factor in
causing the plaintiff’s harm.

b. Issues statement for IRAC 2 or 4 questions to the

courts.
a. Will the plaintiffs be able to prove the apprehensions of a
harmful or offensive contact?
b. Was the plaintiff’s apprehension of contact reasonable?

c. Application Statement for IRAC Apply all four

elements.

2Ba1. When the defendant ran…, the act would be

considered a harmful manner. The defendant was wearing…
The defendant’s words…
Objective Standard Test, Reasonable Person would, and Fea
And
2Ba2. The contact was reasonable enough for the plaintiff to
flee in terror away from the incoming defendant.

d. Analysis Statement for IRAC R.S.T, Fear, Belief of

Plaintiff.

c. If A suffers fright because B is running carelessly toward

A, there is n assault. However, if A insists on shooting
an arrow above B and A knows with a substantially
certain it will cause apprehension to B, A is liable for
assault even if A does not desire to cause apprehension.
The defendant’s motive is irrelevant, provided she either
desired or knownlimgy created apprehension
d. Words alone do not amount to an assault.
e. Touching is offensive if it offends a reasonable person’s
sense of dignity.
f. Even fear of offensive or harmful touching.
 Sanutti ILA Module 4

e. Conclusion Statement for IRAC

2Ba1e. Therefore, the plaintiff produced apprehension of a
contact that would be both harmful and offensive in nature. Given
the circumstances surrounding the case, a reasonable person
would believe that someone running….would be offensive in
nature and harmful to the plaintiff.

2Ba2 Therefore, the defendant willfully produced an external

manifestation …to produce a consequence that would frighten or
terrorize the plaintiff.

In this case present, all two elements of the tort of assault

have been met. Therefore, the defendant has committed the act of
assault

2 C. False Imprisonment is an act of restraint on another person which

confines that person in a bounded area. The deprivation of personal liberty

1. Elements of False Imprisonment.

A. Detention or restraint against a person will
B. Unlawfulness of the detention or restraint

Restraint must be total implies the absence of a reasonable

means of escape

Restatement 2d of Tort False Imprisonment

1. The actor intends to confine the other or third person within
boundaries fixed by the actor, and
2. They act directly or indirectly results in such confinement of
the other, and
3. The other is conscious of the confinement or is harmed by it.
Exception -Negated if an unconscious victim sustains
actual harm

To constitute false imprisonment, there must be an exercise

of force or express or implied threat of force, by which the
person has been deprived of his/her liberty and compelled to
remain where she/he does not wish to remain. The restraint
of a person can be caused, by actual force and the threats
can be by conduct or by words. It is not necessary that the
force in an action for false imprisonment be expressed. It can
also be implied in nature.

2. Confinement
A. Restatement 2d of Torts § 36 | What Constitutes Confinement

1. To make the actor liable for false imprisonment, the

other’s confinement within the boundaries fixed by the
 Sanutti ILA Module 4

actor must be complete.

2. The confinement is complete although there is a
reasonable means of escape unless the other knows of it.
3. The actor does not become liable for false imprisonment by
intentionally preventing another from going in a particular
direction in which he has a right or privilege to go.

Confinement can be:

(1) physical barriers, or
(2) physical force, or
(3) implicit OR explicit threat of physical force, or
(4) false assertion of legally authority to confine, or
duress of good.

Aiding, Abetting, and Inducement: A person who (1) instigates

confinement or (2) induces another r to (3) unlawfully confines
another may be subject to liability.

Special Exception: A police officer falsely arresting a citizen is not

the tort of false imprisonment but instead is false arrest.

IRAC
Issues 1. Did the defendant intend to restrict the plaintiffs
freedom?
2. The plaintiff had no reasonable means of escape?
3. The restriction was unlawful?

Rules Two (2) elements + Reasonable Subject Test

Analysis a. The restraint must be total.
b. Total restraint implies absence of reasonable
means of escapes.
Ex. The restraint may be total where D to
Subject P to his/her authority with no
Option to leave.
The essential element is total restraint.

2D. Trespass to Chattel and Trespass to Conversion

These are two separate intentional
 Sanutti ILA Module 4

2 E. Tresspass to Land

Single Intent: The trespasser need ONLY to intend to enter the land, not to trespass on the
land nor to have been reasonably able to foresee harm.

Elements of Tresspass to Land are

1. the planitiffs ownwership or control of the property,

2. the defendant intentional, reckless, or negliegent entry onto the
property,
3. lack of permission for the entry or acts in excess of permission,
4. 4 harm, and
5. The defendant conndcts was a sunstantioanl factor in causing the
harm

IRAC

Issues

Rule

Analyisi Plaintiff must prove (1) an ownership or possessory interest in the land AND an
(2) intentional AND (3) tangible (i) invasion, (ii) intrusion, OR (iii) entry (4) by defendant
onto the land.
Conclusion

I
2E Trespass to Land is a
1. Elements for Trespass
2. Cases
3. Rules Statements for IRAC

A. Unintentional Tort is not done by deliberate actions, caused

by an accident
B1. Elements of an Unintentional Tort
a .k
b.
 Sanutti ILA Module 4

c.
B2. Types of Unintentional Tort

Cullison v. Medley, 570 N.E. 2d 27 (Ind. 1991)

McCann v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 210 F.3d 51 (1st Cor. 2000)

Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Mitchell, 877 S.W.2d 616 (Ky. Ct. App.

1994)

Bradley v. American Smelting Co., 709 P.2d 782. (Wa. 1985)

Elements of a Tort