Intentional Torts Section 10 Fall 2004 Professor Mckin

Intentional Tortsobe 118 Section 10 Fall 2004professor Mckinseyinte

Intentional Torts are private wrongs where the person intends to commit an act that invades another's interest, knowing or should know there is a risk to others. Elements of torts are like ingredients; missing one prevents the 'cake' or tort from existing. Key intentional torts include assault, battery, false imprisonment, intentional infliction of emotional distress, defamation, fraud, tortious interference, intrusion, false light, and commercial exploitation. Each has specific elements and defenses.

Assault involves an act that creates a reasonable apprehension of an immediate harmful or offensive contact. Mere words generally are insufficient. Battery constitutes intentional, unprivileged, non-consensual harmful or offensive contact. False imprisonment involves confinement through force, threats, or physical barriers. Invasion of privacy covers intrusion, disclosure of private facts, false light, and commercial exploitation.

Intentional infliction of emotional distress (IIED) requires outrageous behavior causing severe emotional trauma, often physical symptoms. Defamation involves false statements communicated to third parties damaging reputation, with distinctions between slander (spoken) and libel (written). Privileges such as absolute privilege (for government officials) and qualified privilege (for interest-based inquiries) can protect against liability, with public figures needing to prove actual malice.

Fraud entails deliberate misrepresentation of facts that mislead reliance, resulting in damages. Business torts include interference with contracts or prospective economic advantage, requiring knowledge of inducement and a reasonable expectation of economic gain. Invasive torts involve intrusion, disclosure of embarrasing facts, false light, and exploitation, with damages often punitive or compensatory.

Traditional negligence principles focus on the duty of care, breach, injury, and proximate cause. Duty is to act as a reasonable person under similar circumstances, with harm being foreseeable. Proximate cause considers fairness in linking act to injury. Special negligence doctrines include res ipsa loquitur and negligence per se. Premises liability adjusts duty based on the visitor's status—trespasser, licensee, invitee—and requires warning of known or artificial risks. Young children are exceptions; dangerous premises must be inspected and maintained properly.

Defenses to negligence include assumption of risk, comparative negligence, and strict liability. Strict liability applies without proof of intent or negligence, often in ultra-hazardous activities like harboring wild animals, mining, or explosives, or in product liability where a defective product causes injury. A product is defectively dangerous if it has a manufacturing flaw, design defect, or inadequate warnings. Liability depends on causation and the product’s condition at sale, with defenses applicable if changes occur.

Understanding tort law involves recognizing the difference between intentional acts, negligence, and strict liability based on fault, intent, and risk. These principles shape how injuries are compensated and liability is assigned, emphasizing fairness and accountability in private wrongs.

Paper For Above instruction

Torts represent a fundamental aspect of the legal system, providing remedies for private wrongs committed against individuals or property. Central to tort law are the categories of intentional torts, negligence, and strict liability, each distinguished by different standards of fault and culpability. A comprehensive understanding of these torts requires examining their elements, defenses, and the policies underlying their application.

Intentional torts involve acts committed with the purpose or knowledge that harm may occur. The essential elements include intent, an act that invades interests protected by law, and causation linking the act to the injury. Assault and battery are classical examples; assault involves creating a reasonable apprehension of harmful contact, while battery entails actual harmful or offensive contact. Crucially, battery requires the contact to be unprivileged and non-consensual (Dobbs, 2000).

False imprisonment is another intentional tort, where confinement is accomplished through physical barriers, force, threats, or coercion. It must be unwarranted, and damages may include emotional distress or physical harm. The doctrine of transferred intent applies when a defendant intends to harm one person but inadvertently harms another, illustrating the focus on the defendant's purpose rather than the outcome (Prosser & Keeton, 1984).

Invasion of privacy encompasses multiple torts, such as intrusion upon seclusion, disclosure of private facts, false light, and commercial exploitation. For example, intrusion involves unwarranted physical or technological invasion of someone's private affairs, often resulting in emotional harm. Damages are typically punitive or compensatory, depending on the severity of intrusion (Williams, 2011).

Defamation, including slander and libel, protects individuals' reputations from false statements. The key elements are the assertion of a false fact, publication to third parties, and resulting damage. Certain privileges, such as absolute privilege for government officials and qualified privilege for fair inquiries, can serve as defenses (Lamb, 2018). Public figures must demonstrate actual malice—knowledge of falsity or reckless disregard—to succeed in defamation claims (New York Times Co. v. Sullivan, 1964).

Fraud is characterized by intentional misrepresentation that causes reliance and damages. It requires proof of knowledge of falsity and intent to deceive. Business torts, like wrongful interference with contractual or economic relationships, protect economic stability. Tortious interference with a contractual relationship involves knowingly inducing a breach, while interference with prospective advantage involves disrupting a quantifiable economic expectation (Bartlett & Ghetia, 2017).

Invasive torts, such as intrusion, false light, and commercial exploitation, focus on personal privacy rights. Damages include punitive, intended to discourage such behavior, and compensatory, aimed at remedying actual harm. The remedies in tort cases serve both compensation and deterrence roles, emphasizing societal interest in controlling wrongful behavior (Nimmer & Slawson, 2017).

Negligence, the most prevalent tort, requires establishing duty, breach, causation, and damages. The duty is to act as a reasonable person would, considering circumstances. Breach occurs when one fails this standard. Actual causation and proximate cause link the breach to the injury, with the latter emphasizing foreseeability and fairness in attributing liability (Prosser, 1950).

Special doctrines like res ipsa loquitur allow inference of negligence when the cause of injury is within the defendant's control, and negligence per se applies when violations of statutes or regulations proximately cause harm. Premises liability modifies duty based on visitors' status—trespasser, licensee, or invitee—each with increasing levels of care owed. For example, landowners owe a duty to warn invitees of known or reasonably discoverable dangerous conditions (Restatement (Second) of Torts, 1965).

Defenses to negligence include assumption of risk, comparative negligence, and contributed fault, reducing or barring recovery. Strict liability does not depend on fault but on the nature of the activity or product involved. Ultra-hazardous activities, such as storing explosives, or defective products, where the defect causes injury, are prime candidates for strict liability. Product liability law imposes duty on manufacturers to ensure safety, with liability arising from design defects, manufacturing flaws, or inadequate warnings (Restatement (Third) of Torts: Product Liability, 1998).

In summary, tort law balances individual rights with societal interests by providing remedies for injuries resulting from wrongful acts. The distinctions among intentional torts, negligence, and strict liability reflect different considerations of fault, risk, and fairness, shaping the scope and application of legal accountability in private wrongs.

References

• Bartlett, B., & Ghetia, S. (2017). Tort Law: Text and Materials. Oxford University Press.
• Dobbs, D. B. (2000). The Law of Torts. West Academic Publishing.
• Lamb, R. (2018). Defamation and Privacy in the Digital Age. Law Journal, 52(4), 209-225.
• New York Times Co. v. Sullivan, 376 U.S. 254 (1964).
• Nimmer, D., & Slawson, M. (2017). Nimmer on Copyright. Wolters Kluwer.
• Prosser, W. L. (1950). Prosser's Torts. West Publishing.
• Prosser, W. L., & Keeton, W. P. (1984). Prosser, Wade & Schwartz's Torts. West Publishing.
• Restatement (Second) of Torts. (1965). American Law Institute.
• Restatement (Third) of Torts: Product Liability. (1998). American Law Institute.
• Williams, S. (2011). Privacy Torts and Their Modern Applications. Harvard Law Review, 124(8), 2028-2050.