Torts – Element List
Battery


Act to bring about harmful or offensive contact with the plaintiff or apprehension of
such contact

Intent to do the things above

Causation (result) - directly or indirectly resulted in harmful or offensive contact or
apprehension of such contact
Must have contact, awareness is not necessary (can happen if someone is sleeping, etc.)
Trespass to Land



Act of invasion to real property (above or below the surface included)
Intent of the defendant to bring about the invasion of real property (the intent to be
there, not the intention to trespass)
 Accidental intrusion is not sufficient
 Transferred intent
 I intended to be in this land, but I'm in that land (doesn't matter, the
intention to be on that particular land is enough)
Causation - the invasion was caused by the defendant, or the invasion was set in motion
by the defendant
 Damages to the property are not an issue, whether they exist or not
Trespass to Chattel




Act of interference with plaintiff's right of possession of a chattel - the extent to which a
person is deprived of their property
Intent to perform the act that results in interference with the right of possession - intent
can be transferred
Causation - the defendant caused an interference with the right of possession
Damages - remedy for trespass to chattel

Why is this here this time?
 When you use someone's movable thing, it is not the same as what it
was. There is diminishment in value.
Conversion




Act of interference with the right of possession of a chattel
Intent to perform the act of interference with right of possession
Causation - interference was caused by the defendant's acts
Damages - interference was so serious in nature and consequences as to require
payment of the full value of the chattel as opposed to mere diminishment in value

This is what distinguishes conversion from mere trespass to chattel
1

Example: holding onto someone else's chattel for a long time can turn into
conversion
 Duration, intent (trying to assert dominion or control), amount of
inconvenience done to the owner, seriousness, and amount of damage
done to the chattel are factors that are considered when determining if
it is conversion or trespass to chattel
False Imprisonment



Act or Omission: to act that confines or restrains the plaintiff in a bounded area
Intent: the defendant's intent
Causation

An actor is subject to liability to another for false imprisonment if:
 He intends to confine the other within boundaries fixed by the actor
 His act directly or indirectly results in such a confinement of the other and
 The other is conscious of the confinement or is harmed by it

What constitutes confinement:
 To make the actor liable for false imprisonment, the other's confinement within the
boundaries fixed by the actor must be complete
 The confinement is complete although there is a reasonable means of escape, unless
the other knows of it
 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
Assault
o
o
o
Reasonable apprehension - of immediate/imminent harm or offensive contact
Intent - to bring about the apprehension
Causation - the plaintiff is put in such imminent apprehension

Must have awareness, does not have to have contact

Ability to actually commit the act does not matter, apparent ability is all that matters
o If the signal is to shoot, that's what is considered, if the intention is to hit, that is
considered
 Unless it is impossible to distinguish the two different types of movement
o If the plaintiff knew that the gun had no bullets, there is no reasonable fear of being
shot
 If they have a fear of guns and the person is aware of that fear, that is still an
assault to their sensibilities
 If it can be proved that the person knows that the other has a fear of
guns but acted anyway - Eggshell Principle

Protecting the right to physical integrity/space, space can be invaded simply by creating anxiety
- even if no real physical contact has been made
o Now that the action has happened, the person is no longer the same as they were
before
2



What is the intent required to commit assault?
o It is the intent to commit the act; not the intent to cause the apprehension or any other
harm
o Transferred intent applies here - you intent to scare one person but actually scare
another, still assault
o You intend the act that causes the apprehension, not necessarily to cause the
apprehension itself
Words - have to have an apparent ability to cause harm or offense - purpose of the words is to
cause apprehension
o Words alone may not suffice in every instance
Conditional threats - "if the gun wasn't outside, I would kill you" - no present, immediate threat
o Apprehension should be reasonable
Outrage



Act - defendant committed an extreme and outrageous act
Intent - defendant intended to cause severe emotional severe, or was reckless as to the effect of
defendant's conduct
Causation - there must be a casual connection between the defendant's actions and the
plaintiff's emotional distress
Damages - the plaintiff was emotionally injured

Actual malice for public officials

Outrageous conduct causing severe emotional distress

One who by extreme and outrageous conduct intentionally or recklessly causes severe
emotional distress to another is subject to liability for such emotional distress and if bodily harm
to the other results from it, for such bodily harm
Where such conduct is directed at a third person, the actor is subject to liability if he
intentionally or recklessly causes emotional distress to a member of such person's immediate
family who is present at the time, whether not such distress results in bodily harm or(b) to any
other person who is present at the time, if such distress results in bodily harm



Intolerable - certain things cause emotional distress and mental suffering, horror, distress,
anger, etc.
 Victims' physical space is no longer the same
 It must be severe, no minor insults, intolerable is a society with decency standards
 No need to prove injury or physical contact
 Some courts require that unless there is accompaniment of physical injury, they will not
take the case
Negligence

Duty - precaution, care, what the reasonably prudent person in like circumstances would have
done
o What precautions could have been taken to prevent
3




Reasonable person standard dependent on what a reasonable blind person
would do, reasonable deaf person, etc.
 Standard by custom
 Standard by statute/law
 Cost-benefit
Breach - breach of duty by the defendant
Cause - actual or approximate cause
Damage - breach resulted in damage to the plaintiff's person or property
4