Torts cases

Picard v Barry Pontiac-Buick Inc.

(battery of object attached to person) Woman brought a camera to her repair ship and took a picture of the employee, employee pointed his finger at her, P claims that there was a physical struggle over the camera and D denies. P may recover for assault and battery where she had a reasonable fear of imminent bodily harm. Offensive contact with something attached to P's person constitutes a battery

Garrett v Dailey

(intent for battery for an infant) 5 y/o pushed a chair out from under woman when she went to sit down, the woman fell and injured her hip. Did the boy know with substantial certainty that Garrett would attempt to sit in the chair? Remanded to see if the boy knew with substantial certainty.

Fisher v Carrousel Motor Hotel

(objective offensive contact) P was attending a luncheon at a conference, when in line an employee snatched his plate out of his hand and shouted that he wouldn't be served bc he was a Negro. P sued for humiliation and punitive damages. A party may commit battery by intentionally touching, in an offensive manner, anything physically connected with the other person.

Spivey v Battaglia

(plaintiff's susceptibility to battery) At work, a coworker put his arm around P and brought her head close to him in a friendly way, after P experienced neck pain. Was D's act negligence or assault and battery? Liable for negligence bc it was an unintentional act with a foreseeable risk rather than an intentional act with substantially certain results.

Cohen v Smith

(plaintiff's susceptibility) Woman was given C section and a male staff member viewed and touched her unclothed body after she stated it was against her religion for other men to see her naked body. P claimed battery. Offensive touching occurs if the tortfeasor knew of a person's susceptibility of the touching

Osborn v Irwin Memorial Blood Bank

A blood bank failing to perform blood testing and to screen for HIV/AIDS in 1983 is not liable for professional negligence when such tests were not accepted practice for blood banks in the profession nationwide.

Ballew v. Aiello

Actus Reus P was riding in a care with defendants and their wives. Gilmore was in the passenger seat and dozed off. They hit the rough shoulder, gilmore awoke and saw they were headed to a rock and snatched the wheel causing a collision with another car. There was no volitional action on his part in grabbing and jerking the steering wheel, and that, therefore, such evidence was insufficient, as a matter of law, to make a submissible case against him.

Holloway v. Wachovia Bank

Assault D came to the laundromat to repossess P's car, the plaintiffs tried to leave in the car, D allegedly pointed a gun at P when reaching through the car to get the keys, D touched P and child when she did this. P's mother claimed assault. Gun was not directly pointed at the mother. Intent was transferred to apply to the mother who was in the backseat.

United States v Carroll Towing

Carroll tugboat caused US flour carrying barge to sink. Liability for negligence due to failure to take safety precautions exists if the burden of taking such precautions is less than the probability of injury multiplied by the gravity of any resulting injury, symbolized by B < PL = negligence liability.

DIllon v Legg

Child struck by car and killed in front of his mother, sued for NEID, created considerations test (above) when outside zone of impact (restatement & most courts) (a) the plaintiff was physically situated near the scene of the accident; (b) the plaintiff personally witnessed the accident happen; and (c) the plaintiff was related to the victim of the accident.

Pearson v Dodd

Conversion Former employees of a senator made unknown copies of documents and sold them to a journalist, senator claimed conversion The claim was not valid because D's ownership of the documents was maintained for full utility and purpose

Derdiarian v Felix Contracting Corp.

D contracted installation of gas line to worksite, DIckens was driving, had an epileptic seizure, hit the kettle using gas line and caused an explosion. Sued for unsafe worksite. Intervening act of third person between negligence and harm does not necessarily break the causal chain.

Wagon Mound I

D negligently spilled oil from their ship into Harbor, P's dock was being welded on and a spark landed on the oil slick igniting P's dock and a neighboring dock and ships.

Butterfield v Forrester

D places a pole across a public road that created partial obstruction P was horse riding fast, obstruction was visible, P was not exercising duty of care and did not see obstruction therefore he could not recover for damages

Katko v Briney

D rigged a spring shotgun to harm possible trespassers on their seemingly abandoned land. Plaintiff broke in to steal and then was caught by the trap set and shot in the leg. Owner cannot use deadly force to protect property

Compuserve v Cyber Promotions

D sent unsolicited emails to internet users, P tried to block the emails but D hacked the system causing damage to their system. D was held liable for dispossessing P of it's property Illustrates intangible trespass to chattel in the digital age

Bowden v Speigle

D threatened P on a phone call with legal action unless she paid her bill, P did not owe any money to D. The words caused her to be so distressed that she became physically ill. Are words that result in physical injury able to be claimed for IIED? Yes, the method used by D to collect debt was unreasonable.

Watson v Kentucky

D was driving a tanker full of gasoline which spilled on the street, third party dropped match and caused explosion which injured P. Criminal act of third party is not a reasonably foreseeable act and broke the causal chain making D's act not the proximate cause as there is a superseding cause between the act and the injury.

Amphitheaters In. v Portland Meadows

Drive in movie theater built near horse race track, the race track lights affected business at the drive in, a defendant may not be found liable for nuisance if its conduct would not annoy or inconvenience a person of ordinary habits or sensibilities. A private nuisance is conduct that hurts or annoys another's enjoyment of that party's property. Private nuisance does not constitute trespass.

Teichmiller v Rogers Memorial Hospital

False Imprisonment P was fired by employer and asked to fill out paperwork, blocked from leaving the room without being physically touched, she was being arregively yelled at, never specifically asked to leave but tried to walk out multiple times, supervisors were not liable for false imprisonment when they never physically restrained her nor did P ask to leave the room, is there false imprisonment if you are at work getting paid

Farwell v Keaton

Friends were in a fight, injured friend was left in the car overnight and died from injuries other fried was liable as he had a special relationship and voluntarily assumed duty to rescue

Figueiredo-Torres v Nickel

IIED P was seeing a psychiatrist to fix his marital problems, the psychiatrist began having an affair with his wife. The relationship was inappropriate, D knew that P was susceptible to marital issues, and D advised P not to be with his wife. The court should not have dismissed IIED

McGuire v. Almy

Intent P was nurse in charge of D, D was mentally challenged and became violent, D struck P on the head with piece of broken furniture. If a legally insane person causes intentional damage to the person or property of another, he is liable for that damage in the same circumstances in which a sane person would be liable.

Bradley v Hunter

Man went into a restaurant and was refused service due to previous threats, he aggressively approached the elderly Ds, they fired warning shot, he kept approaching, they shot him, the defendant used reasonable force that she reasonably believed was necessary to prevent the harm

De May v Roberts

Married woman giving birth, her doctor brought along another man, P believed that he was a medical professional but he was not. She consented to his presence under misrepresentation, P consented to a medical professional being there.

J.S. v R.T.H .

Neighbor owed duty to protect children from spouse's sexual abuse that she knew was forseeable

Vosburg v Putney

One friend kicked another, the other friend felt pain later which made him extremely ill, leg was previously injured and the kick activated bacteria. Regardless of D's intent the act was unlawful and he can be liable

Mcentyre v Balentine

P and D got in a car accident, both had been drinking and D was speeding comparative negligence may apply even if a plaintiff is contributorily negligent

Hodgeden v Hubbard

P bought a stove from fraudulent and misrepresented credit from the warehouse the defendants worked at. When the following day the defendants gained knowledge of the fraud claims they forcibly took the stove back from the defendant. D used unreasonable force in getting the stove back

Mcdougald v Garber

P had a C section and suffered brain damage when deprived of oxygen, she was awarded for damages including pain and suffering and loss of pleasures and pursuits of her life.

Martin v Reynolds Metals Co.

P sued for trespass of land because due to the actions of the metal company a fluoride compound settled on their land. The court ruled that invisible particles settling on land is a sufficient direct invasion of P's interest to his property

Enright v Groves

P violated dog leash ordinance and an officer came to her house where she was in her car and arrested her for not showing the officer her drivers license. There was no ordinance that required her to show her license. Sued for false imprisonment for taking her into custody without proper legal authority.

Smith v Calvary Christian Church

P was a member of a church where he consented to the church's practices, he was punished for his actions. He cannot succeed in the torts claims because he consented by actively engaging in the church.

Avila v Citrus Comm Coll

P was at a college baseball game and hit in the head with pitch, a participant in sporting event assumed the risk or injury

Li v Yellow Cab Co. of CA

P was crossing 3 lanes of oncoming traffic, D was speeding and ran a yellow light, negligent conduct by both P and D contributed to the har,, liability is assessed in direct proportion to fault

Larson v St Francis Hotels

P was hit by a chair thrown out of hotel window. For a defendant to be liable under the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur, the plaintiff must prove that the instrument that caused the accident was under exclusive control of the defendant and that if the defendant was using ordinary care, the accident would not have occurred.

Richardson v Chapman

P was in a car at a stop light when the car was hit but a semi, lost use of her legs and suffered pain along with many other injuries. Pain and suffering compensation was found excessive

Palsgraf

P was injured by train scales falling due to explosives when passenger was pushed aboard to catch train and dropped his package. D owes duty of care to P if the P is in the zone of reasonably foreseeable harm from D's actions.

Trimarco v Klein

P was injured when shower door shattered, company was found negligent for not using the industry standard safety glass

Davies v Mann

P's donkey was tied on side of the road, D was speaking and ran over the donkey, D had the last clear chance to not speed and avoid the accident

Helling v Carey

Patient sued doctor when she was diagnosed with a disease at a young age that he failed to catch after her complaints, D was acting within the reasonable norm established by medical professionals, illustrates some of the conflicts that can arise when a court's authority to determine the "duty of care" owed by the defendant is challenged by a different "professional" standard of care

Bigtown Nursing Home v Newman

Plaintiff was held at a nursing home beyond his will and attempted escape multiple times. fixed boundaries (four walls) are not required to meet the definition of confinement. Just need some sort of bounded area that keeps P from doing what they want

Russell-Vaughn Ford, Inc. v. Rouse

Potential customer took his car to be traded in, salesman made an offer and P declined, D then stated he didn't know where the car keys were, P called the police. Withholding the keys from the owner of the car was conversion because it is not required that a person take all means possible to regain possession of personal property.

Ploof v Putnam

Putnam owned an island and boat dock. Ploof was boating in a storm and tied his boat to the dock, Putnam's servant untied the boat and Ploof's family was injured. Necessity doctrine is valid especially when human lives are at risk. Property owner's rights to exclude people from said property can be overruled in cases of emergency such as this.

Tarasoff v Regents of Uni of Cali

School psychologist did not properly notify victim before she was killed by ex boyfriend. Psychologist owed a duty to warn victim of harm.

Thomas v Bedford

Teacher severely shook child as punishment, child was injured, a teacher can use reasonable force to discipline but this amount of force was considered unreasonable

Caldor Inc., v Bowden

Teenager that was held by the company in the office where he attempted to leave but the door was blocked. D would not let P call his parents with his phone. He was accused of stealing money from the registers, he was in the office until after the store closed. His mother came the next day and D used racial slurs and other disturbing words. Another employee grabbed his arm and tried to make him return to the store. IIED was not found here because evidence failed to show severity needed to support this tort.

Glidden v Szybiak

Trespass to chattels Child went onto someone's porch to pet their dog, pulled the dog's ears, the dog bit the child. Child sued for damages from the bite and D sued for trespass. Owner couldn't prove dispossession or harm to the dogs so couldn't prove; must have substantial harm

Doughtery v Stepp

Trespass to land D entered P's land with a surveyor attempting to claim part of it as his own. doesn't matter if it causes no actual damages; trespass is entering without permission. The law regard land as already enclosed.

The T.J. Hopper

Two tugboats lost a barge they were towing because they were not equipped with radio that would announce storm warnings, D can be negligent for not adopting new technology if not using that technology constitutes negligence

Wagon Mount II

When applying foreseeable harm approach, the new court found that the same act was a foreseeable injury from the negligent act

Whittaker v Sanford

Woman seeking to abandon religious group not able to get off of the ship. D refused to give her a row boat to get to shore. P was on the boat for a month but allowed to go offshore with her husband. Sheriff helped her get off of the ship. D is liable for false imprisonment even though he did not use physical force because there was no means of escape except for the row boats that were withheld from P by D. D had control of P's boundaries.

Maddox v City of NY

Yankees bball player was injured during the game when his foot was stuck on the mud, athletes assume risk of duty, knew the field was wet and still played

McQuiggan v. Boy Scouts of America

battery McQuiggan was injured when a paperclip hit his eye, kids were playing a game throwing paper clips at each other, All of the participants knew the object of the game and that there was a chance somebody could be hit with a paperclip. No. It is well settled that a plaintiff who consents to participate in any sport, game, or contest in which injury is possible does not have a tort claim if he sustains an injury as a result of his participation.

Herrin v Southerland

owns all the space above and below the land; gun shot over land/cattle "disturbed and interfered" thus committed a technical trespass