Model Format

• D may be liable to P for BATTERY
• BATTERY is the intentional, unlawful, harmful or offensive touching of another,whether indirect or direct, without justification or excuse.
• What happened? Who was the toucher and the touchee?
• Was the touching intentional?
• Was the touching unlawful?
• Was the touching harmful?
• Was the touching offensive?
• The touching was direct/indirect because...
• There was/was not justification because...

Assault is the unlawful, intentional placing of another in apprehension of imminent bodily contact, with the apparent ability to carry it out.

P was in apprehension of imminent bodily contact because...

D had the apparent ability to carry out ______ because....

Words themselves, no matter how threatening, do not constitute an assault. The actor must be in a position to carry out the threat and must also take affirmative action to do so.

• FI is the unlawful restraint of another through force or threat or force whcih confines someone to a bounded area w/o adequate justification or excuse, where one is aware of it or harmed by it
• D unlawfully restrained P when.......
• D used force or threat of force when .....

• P was confined to _____ when.....
• There was/was not adequate justification or excuse because.....
• P was aware of the FI bc....
• OR
• P was harmed by the FI bc....

• FA occurs when one is taken into custody by a person who claims to have the proper legal authority but that person does not have it
• D was taken into custody when ___ .....
• D claimed to have the proper authority when....
• D did not have the proper legal authority bc....

• IIED is the
• intentional OR RECKLESS,
• EXTREME AND OUTRAGEOUS conduct that causes someone to suffer severe emotional distress

• D had the intent to cause P emotional distress bc....
• D's conduct was EXTREME AND OUTRAGEOUS. The conduct EXTENDS ALL BOUNDS that can be tolerated by a civil society bc....
• P had a severe response to D's conduct, which is evidenced by....
• CAUSATION: D's conduct caused P's emotional distress.
• This is an objective standard unless D had specific knowledge of P's sensitivities, then the test is subjective

TTL is the intentional, unlawful entry upon land into possession of another.

• (Insert intent analysis here)
• The entry was unlawful bc....
• The land was possessed by.....

TTC occurs when the chattel is

• - IMPAIRED as to CONDITION, QUALITY or VALUE
• OR
• - Possessor is DEPRIVED of its use for an extended time
• OR
• - Bodily harm occurs to possessor or harm is caused to some person or thing in which the possessor has a legally protected interest

• The chattel was impaired as to its condition, quality or value, shown by.....
• The possessor was deprived of its use for an extended time when.....
• Bodily harm occurred to P
• OR
• Harm was caused to _____, and _____ had a legally protected interest in _____

• Conversion is the intentional EXERCISE OF DOMINION
• OR
• CONTROL OVER CHATTEL
• which so seriously INTERFERES with the right of another to CONTROL IT that the actor may be justly required to PAY the other the FULL VALUE of the CHATTEL

Did D have General Intent to _____ ?

General Intent is a voluntary act setting in motiuon a chain of events that D knew with substantial certainty that the outcome is likely to occur

The voluntary act was_____

The chain of events was ______

D had to know with substantiual certainty that ______ would occur when D did ______.

Specific intent is a purpose or design to cause the contact OR harm

D specifically intended to _____

TRANSFERRED INTENT occurs when:

• D intends to do one tort but does another
• D intended to do one tort, accomplkished that, and then did a second tort
• D intended to do harm to P1, but instead harmed P2.
• FIT BAT

D can claim the privilege of CONSENT.

For D to successfully prove consent, the consent must be knowing and voluntary

D must reveal facts that are critical for P to give valid consent

• The consent was apparent bc based on P's actions, a reasonable person would have believed consent had occurred
• OR
• The consent was implied bc special circumstances that occurred when _____, made it desirable for ____ to engage in conduct that would otherwise be a tort

D's actions were reasonable bc.....

D was provoked by _____ when _____ .....

D used the amount of force necessary under the circumstances, bc.....

D's actions were reasonable bc.....

D was provoked by _____ when ____ .....

Used the amount of force necessary under the circumstances, bc.....

The owner of dispossessed chattel may use reasonable force to recover chattel immediately after disposition

- D's property was dispossessed of _____, when ____ .....

- D used force when .....

- The force was reasonable bc.....

- D recovered the property immediately after despossession bc.....

Necessity provides a privilege for private rights

First, exigent circumstances must require destruction of another's property for public goods. Here the facts indicate that.....

Second, the D acted in good faith, not in personal interest or ill will. The facts show that......

The necessity does not have to be actual, only apparent.

HERE THE FACTS INDICATE THAT THE ARREST WAS UNDER WARRANT

- If the gvt entity makes a mistake, the police officers are responsible for that mistake.

• HERE THE FACTS INDICATE THAT THAT THE ARREST WAS WITHOUT WARRANT
• - Police officers and private citizens do have the privilege to arrest w/o a warrant, but the police have more leeway

• - If the officer HAS REASONABLE GROUNDS for believing that a felony has been coomitted, and that he has the right person, the officer will not be liable
• - If a private citizen makes the arrest, he HAS TO KNOW a felony has been committed and believe that person is responsible for that felony

• - If the breach of peace is not a felony:
• - The offense must be committed in his presence
• - Must be in fresh pursuit
• - No excessive force is allowed

Discipline is the privilege of exercising reasonable FORCE and RESTRAINT.

Parents have the right to discipline kids as long as it doesn't create a permanent harm and the parent uses reasonable force.

- Here the facts indicate that the parent (describe the action) to (kid).

- No permanent harm was created, bc the facts indicate that.....

- The parent used reasonable force bc....

JUSTIFICATION is the lawful excuse for an act which otherwise might be illegal.

Justification is used to keep a D from being held liable when it would be unjust to do so.

NEGLIGENCE happens when a person's conduct falls below a reasonable standard of care, established by the court, to protect individuals from unreasonable harm.

The court looks at DUTY, BREACH, ACTUAL CAUSE, PROXIMATE CAUSE, and HARM in determining NEGLIGENCE

Negligence is conduct that falls below the standard of care established by the law for the protection of others against unreasonable risk of harm

To decide whether D had a duty, first we must determine the standard of care:

1. Reasonable person standard (objective standard) - The person's conduct being evaluated is deemed to have the knowledge an ordinary reasonable person would have, focusing on what he knew or should have known

• 2. Custom (some customs are so unreasonable)
• 3. Emergency (Was reasonable in an emergency situation?)
• 4. Disabled person (Reasonable disabled person)
• 5. Children (Child or adult activity?)
• 6. Mental illness (no exception)
• 7. Professional standard

BREACH OF DUTY occursd when there is a failure to conform to conduct that is reasonable under the circumstances

- But for _____, P's injury would have occurred

- ___'s injury was a substantial factoir for the injury

- The harm was reasonably foreseeable bc.....

- However, an intervening cause breaks the causal chain bc.....

- The cause was superseding bc....

• - The cause was extraordinary and unforeseeable bc....
• OR
• - The independent action was far removed from ___'s conduct

• CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE is
• CONDUCT on the part of the P which falls below the standard of conduct to which he shold conform for his own protection,
• and which islegally CONTRIBUTING CAUSE COOPERATING with the negligence in bringing about the P's harm

- P had actual and conscious knowledge of the risk bc....

- P's action were voluntary bc.....

- P knowingly and voluntarily took on the risk bc......

Here the facts indicate that the assumption of risk was express

- P explicitly agreed to assume the risk

OR

Here the facts indicate that the assumption of risk was implied

- We can imply by P's conduct that _____ assumed the risk bc.....

- _____ violated the statute when .....

- The violation was excuseble bc.....

- ____ was in exclusive control of the instrumentality of injury


- _____ was not contributorily negligent