Intent

• Defendant must have intended to bring about some sort of physical or mental effect upon another person.
  • This does not need to include a desire to harm that person.
  • Ex. B moved his hand through the air and accidentally slapped C = not a battery.  B slapped C, but did not intend to harm C =a battery (because of B’s intent to make bodily contact).
• Intent to commit a different tort:
  • A person who intends to commit one intentional tort but instead commits another is liable for the tort committed.
    • Ex. B intends to scare C by shooting at C and missing; however, B hits C.
      • Tort initially intended to commit=intent to shoot to scare (intentional infliction of an “apprehension of bodily contact”) = tort of assault
      • Tort committed=intentional infliction of a harmful or offensive bodily contact = tort of battery
• Occurrence can be intentional if defendant did not desire it, but knew with substantial certainty that it would occur as a result of his action.
  • Garratt v. Dailey, 46 Wash. 2d 197, 279 P.2d 1091
    • 5 year old, chair, substantial certainty that plaintiff would fall onto the ground
  • Act must be intentional or substantially certain, but the consequences do not have to be intended or substantially certain or foreseeable.
• Intent to harm is not necessary; intent to perform the action is necessary.
  • P. Vosburg v Putney, 50 N.W. 403 (Wis. 1891)
    • Kick classmate with no intent to harm, injuries result, intent to kick is important.
• Ignorance of the law is no excuse.
• Insane people are liable for their torts
  • P. McGuire v Almy, 8 N.E.2d 760 (Mass. 1937)
  • An insane person is liable for tort for damages caused when he is:
    1. Capable of entertaining intent to commit unlawful, harmful act
    2. Entertained that intent
    3. Acted upon that intent
• Transferred Intent
  • Doctrine of “Transferred Intent” may apply to many kinds of torts.
    • As long as the defendant possessed the necessary intent with respect to one person, that intent may be held for any other person who gets injured.

 

Nominal and Punitive Damages

In deciding whether a defendant’s actions constitute an intention tort or negligence, an important consequence of the decision is the measure of damages.

1. Nominal Damages:
   • If tort is intentional, nominal damages may be awarded even if no evidence of pecuniary harm can be shown.
   • If negligent, nominal damages are not rewardable.
2. Punitive Damages:
   • If defendant’s conduct was outrageous or malicious, plaintiff may recover punitive damages.
   • If negligent, punitive damages are not rewardable.

Liability for Unexpected Results

• If intentional, defendant would be liable for virtually every direct and sometimes indirect consequence of the tort, regardless of likelihood of the result.
• If negligent, defendant will usually be held liable for results that are only somewhat foreseeable.

 Battery

• Battery is the intentional infliction of a harmful or offensive bodily contact. 
  • Harmful OR Offensive
    • Mohr v Williams, 104 N.W. 12 (Minn. 1905)
      • Consent for surgery on one ear, but Dr does surgery on the other instead. Dr’s surgery was battery even though not harmful.
  • Victim does not need to be aware of contact
  • Beyond level consented to is also battery