Wrongs that fall below a legal standard and are recognized by law as grounds for a lawsuit

Wrongdoing and Injury

An Act with:

Intent to touch and intent to harm or offend

resulting:

Touching and harm or offense

An Act with:

Intent to cause harm or offensive touching or Apprehension of Touching

Result: Apprehension of Imminent Battery

(1) Intent to Confine

(2) Actual Confinement created by (D)

(3) (P) Aware or harmed by confinement

The intention which is necessary to make the acor liable is not necessarily an intention to cause a harm but the actor intends to produce such an effect upon some other person and that act intended is the legal cause of a harmful contact

D intends tort on P1 and commits on another P

(1) Purpose to produce harmful / offensive contact

(2) knowledge with substantial certainty that consequences would result

Intent and an act that results in:

Confinements

+

(Bounded area)

+ 

Victim Aware or Harmed

1. Person confined without lawful privilege against consent for an appreciable time

2. no reasonable/ safe way to escape

3. future threat is not confinement

4. implicit threats

5. Aware or harm

An Act with intent to harm or offensive touching or apprehension of touching

Result: Apprehension of imminent Battery

Does Negating intent result in an Assault?

Example: "If the cop wasn't here I'd hit you"

Intent to enter land on purpose or substantial certainty (body or object)

+

Result: Enter land of another

*mistake is not a defense*

The Branch of law dealing with such wrongs:

The set of rules regarding liability and compensation for personal injury, death and property damage that one party causes to another. It is about the rules for shifting loses from injured victims to those causing injuries

1. individual fairness

2. Social Utility

3. Admnistrative Efficiency

4. Compensation

5. Loss Internalization

6. Deterrence

7. Support Economic Activities

8. Support Enviornmental Protection

1. Negligence

2. Intentional Torts

3. Strict Liability

1. Injunctive Relief

2. Restitution

3. Damages

                        (a)Comepnsatory

                (b) Punitive

                 (c) Nominals

Key Ways Cases are Decided

(Trial Procedures)

1. Motion to Dissmiss Complain

2. Motion for Summary Judgement (after gathering of facts)

3. Motion for Directed Verdict at Trial (After plaintif's pleadings)

4. Evidentiary Decisions

5. Jury Instructions

6. Motion for judgement notwistanding verdict (renewal of directed verdict - evidence not sufficient to justify jury verdict)

7. Motion for New Trial

Procedural - How the law is applied

Substantive - What law is applied

Ex: VanCamp v. McAfoos

Did Trial court correctly grant motion to dismiss where no allegation of legal wrong?

Intent to exercise dominion over chattel

+

Action seriously interferes with P's right of possession

Damages: Full Market Value

Intent to Act on Chattel which causes interference with chattel

resulting:

Harm = Dispossession / Lost Use

or

Harm to chattel or P

Actual Damage: Less than conversion

 - Use Reasonable Force 

- While in Hot Pursuit

- If Mistaken  - No Privilege

- Breach of the Peace

- In the Presence of D

- If Mistaken - No Privilege

- Reasonable Belief P took goods

- Proper purpose for detention

- Reasonable Manner of Detention

If Reasonably Mistaken: Can Detain & Claim Privilege

-Express or Implied

-Consent to act bars recovery for Harm resulting from act

- appearance of consent negates intent to Offend (prima facia case not proved)

RII Rule:

- P Cannot Sue

- Consent is Effective

- P Can Consent to Crime

Caveats:

Statue Protects P

Scope of Consent

May interfere where reasonably and apparently necessary where the act is for Public Good.

Defense is Absolute

Where Act for Private Benefit, D has qualified privilege to enter but:

if harm, D must PAY damages

One may be priviliged to comit assault or false imprisonment as a self defense.

Ex: pointing a gun to prevent an assault