Chapter 6

Intentional Torts & Business Torts

PresenterPresentation NotesA wide variety of intended acts can have unintended consequences. With intentional torts, the defendant may not have intended to harm the plaintiff, but her deliberate actions have resulted in alleged injury. Anticipating the harm that can result enables us to consider carefully the actions themselves.

Jane Doe and Nancy Roe v. Lynn Mills

Did the plaintiffs make a valid claim of intentional infliction of emotional distress?

Dismissal reversed, and remanded for trial.

What are the elements of intentional infliction of emotional distress?

PresenterPresentation NotesCase: Jane Doe and Nancy Roe v. Lynn Mills [1], p. 136Facts: Late one night, an anti-abortion protestor named Robert Thomas climbed into a dumpster located behind the Women's Advisory Center, an abortion clinic. He found documents indicating that the plaintiffs were soon to have abortions at the clinic. Thomas gave the information to Lynn Mills. The next day, Mills and Sister Lois Mitoraj created signs, using the women's names, indicating that they were about to undergo abortions, and urging them not to kill their babies. Doe and Roe (not their real names) sued, claiming intentional infliction of emotional distress (as well as breach of privacy, discussed later in this chapter). The trial court dismissed the lawsuit, ruling that the defendants' conduct was not extreme and outrageous. The plaintiffs appealed.Issue: Have the plaintiffs made a valid claim of intentional infliction of emotional distress?Holding: Dismissal reversed, and remanded for trial. The objectionable aspect of defendants' conduct does not relate to their views on abortion or their right to express those views, but, rather, to the fact that defendants gave unreasonable or unnecessary publicity to purely private matters involving plaintiffs. . . . We believe this is the type of case that might cause an average member of the community, upon learning of defendants' conduct, to exclaim, Outrageous! Question: What are the elements of intentional infliction of emotional distress?Answer: A plaintiff must prove extreme and outrageous conduct that caused her serious emotional harm.Question: According to the appeals court, how does the law determine whether a defendants conduct is sufficiently extreme to constitute this tort?Answer: The court said that the elements have probably been established if the average member of the community would exclaim, outrageous!Question: Dont the defendants have a First Amendment right to express their opinions?Answer: Absolutely.Question: Then how can the appeals court reverse the trial courts dismissal? Isnt the court diminishing the defendants First Amendment rights?Answer: The court acknowledges that the defendants have a right to express their views on abortion. What they do not have a right to do is publicize the names of these women and the fact that they were about to undergo abortions. That is purely private information of no interest to the general public, and that in turn means that the defendants had no right to divulge it.Question: Does the appeals court ruling mean that the plaintiffs have proven their case of intentional infliction of emotional distress?Answer: No. The ruling simply means that the plaintiffs are entitled to a jury trial. The court is ruling that the trial court should not have dismissed the case. A jury could legitimately consider this conduct extreme and outrageous. Now it will be up to a jury to decide whether the conduct really does meet that standard.[1] 212 Mich. App. 73, 536 N.W.2d 824, 1995 Mich. App. LEXIS 313 Michigan Court of Appeals, 1995

Tort Means Wrong

Defamation -- making a false statement about someone - written or verbal

Negligence -- performing wrong surgery Interference with contract -- stealing a client

away from a competitor Fraud -- offering to sell something that

doesnt exist

A tort is a violation of a duty imposed by civil law.

Tort vs. Criminal or Contract Law

Criminal Law -- behavior classified as dangerous to society; prosecuted by the government, whether victim wants to prosecute or not; money award goes to the government

Contract Law -- based on breach of an agreement between the two parties; victim prosecutes and receives compensation or restitution.

Tort Law -- based on an obligation imposed by the law with no agreement needed between parties; victim prosecutes and receives compensation or restitution.

Categories of Tort Law Intentional Torts

Does not necessarily require an intention to harm the victim, only an intention to perform the act which caused the injury. (Intentionally throwing an object, but not meaning to hit anyone is a tort if it causes injury to someone.)

Includes business torts, a category of torts perpetuated almost exclusively by business entities.

Negligence and Strict Liability These tort injuries will be discussed in the next

chapter.

Caudle v. Betts

Can a person be liable for an intentional tort if he did not intend the harm?

PresenterPresentation NotesCaudle worked at Betts Lincoln-Mercury dealer. During an office party, many of the employees, including president Betts, were playing with an electric auto condenser, which gave a slight electric shock when touched. Some employees played catch with the condenser. Betts shocked Caudle on the back of his neck and then chased him around, holding the condenser. The shock later caused Caudle to suffer headaches, to pass out, and eventually to require surgery on a nerve in his neck. Even after surgery, Caudle had a slight numbness on one side of his head. He sued Betts for battery. Betts defended by saying that it was all horseplay and that he had intended no injury. Please rule.Answer: Although the trial court ruled for Betts and the Court of Appeals affirmed, the Louisiana Supreme Court ruled for Caudle. Caudle v. Betts, 512 So. 2d. 389 (La.1987). The court held that it was irrelevant that Betts had shown no malice toward Caudle nor intended to hurt him. Betts intended the physical contact with Caudle. Although he neither expected nor could reasonably have foreseen the medical damage Caudle suffered, Betts is liable for all consequences of the physical contact he intended.

You may reason that a defendant cannot be liable for an intentional tort if he did not intend the harm. Bettsin funshocked Caudle on the neck with an electric auto condenser, resulting in chronic injuries to Caudle. Caudle sued Betts for battery and, after trial and intermediate appellate court decision for Betts, the Louisiana Supreme Court finally got it right and ruled for Caudle. Betts lack of actual intent to harm Caudle was irrelevant; he intended to shock Caudle with the condenser and is liable for the consequences.

Intentional Tort - Defamation Defamation is irresponsible speech to

harm anothers reputation. Written defamation is libel. Verbal defamation is slander.

There are four facts to prove to win a defamation suit: The defamatory statement was actually made. The statement is false. The statement was communicated to someone other

than the plaintiff. In slander cases, the plaintiff must show some injury

that resulted from the defamation.

Defamation (contd) Slander per se -- some statements are so harsh and

potentially damaging that the plaintiff is assumed to be damaged and does not have to prove injury. Accusations of committing a serious crime Claims of having a sexually transmitted disease or

of being an unchaste woman (gender bias in the law)

Alleged professional incompetence

Opinion -- to be defamation, the statement must be provable and not simply someones opinion. Vague terms in the statement usually indicate it is an

opinion, not a provable fact. Extreme exaggerations are usually not taken as fact.

Defamation (contd) Public Personalities

Includes: public officials (police and politicians) and public figures (movie stars and other celebrities)

Public personalities have a harder time winning a defamation case because they have to prove that the defendant acted with actual malice.

Privilege Defendants receive extra protection in special cases. In courtrooms and legislatures, speakers have

absolute privilege. They may speak freely, as long as it is true.

When information is legitimately needed, the speaker giving it has qualified privilege. This may happen when someone reports a suspected criminal act.

Intentional Tort - False Imprisonment

An employer who doesnt let a sick employee go home might be guilty of false imprisonment.

If the police detain a person with no reason to suspect him of any crime, it could be false imprisonment.

In general, a store may detain a person suspected of shoplifting if there is a reasonable basis for the charge and the detention is done reasonably (in private and for a reasonable time).

False imprisonment is the restraint of someone against their will and without reasonable cause.

Historically, no recovery was allowed if the injury was only emotional instead of physical.

Today, most courts allow a plaintiff to recover from a defendant who intentionally causes emotional injury. Behavior causing injury must be extreme and

outrageous. Must have caused serious emotional harm.

Some courts allow recovery for emotional injury caused by negligent behavior.

Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress Intentional Tort --

Intentional Tort --

Assault is an action that causes the victim to fear an imminent battery. Assault can occur without the battery ever

happening. Pulling a gun on someone -- even if it is unloaded -

- is usually considered assault.

Battery is a touching of another person in a way that is unwanted or offensive. The touch does not have to hurt the victim -- sexual

touching that is offensive, but not painful, is battery. An intentional action that does hurt someone may

be battery even if the injury is unintentional.

Battery and Assault

Intentional Tort --

Conversion is taking or using someones property without consent (civil law version of theft).

Trespass is intentionally entering land that belongs to someone else or remaining after being asked to leave. Keeping an object, such as a vehicle, on someone

elses land and refusing to move it is also trespassing.

You may be trespassing if you enter someones property mistakenly believing it is public property.

Trespass, Conversion, and Fraud

Fraud is injuring another person by deliberate deception.

Compensatory Damages

Damages may include money for three purposes: to restore any loss (such as medical expenses)

caused by the illegal action to restore lost wages if the injury kept the

defendant from working to compensate for pain and suffering

A jury may award compensatory damages -- payment for injury --to a plaintiff who prevails in a civil suit.

The Single Recovery Principle mandates that the court must decide all damages -- past, present and future -- at one time and settle the matter completely.

PresenterPresentation NotesA jury may award payment for injury to a plaintiff who wins in a civil suit. The Single Recovery Principle states that the court must decide all damages -- past, present and future -- at one time and settle the matter for good. Damages may include money to recover loss like medical expenses, to restore lost wages if the injury kept the defendant from working or to compensate for pain and suffering

Punitive Damages While the purpose of compensatory damages is to

help the victim recover what was lost, punitive damages are intended to punish the guilty party. Intended for conduct that is outrageous and extreme Designed to make an example out of the

defendant Should deter others from doing same conduct and

prevent this defendant from repeating actions

Sometimes punitive damage awards are huge, but in most cases they are close to or less than the amount of compensatory damages awarded.

PresenterPresentation NotesThe purpose of compensatory damages is to help the victim recover what was lost. But punitive damages are intended to punish the guilty party for conduct that was outrageous and extreme. Its designed to keep the defendant from doing it again. Its also meant to make an example out of the defendant to prevent others from doing same thing.

Tort Reform About half of the states have passed

statutory limits on tort awards. In most cases, a jury can award

whatever seems reasonable for economic damages.

Non-economic damages usually may not exceed a prescribed limit, such as 3 times the economic damages, or a flat cap such as $250,000 total.

Business Torts

Interference with business relations Interference with a contract Interference with a prospective advantage

The rights to privacy and publicity

Intentional torts that occur almost exclusively in a business setting are called business torts.

PresenterPresentation NotesIntentional torts that occur almost exclusively in a business setting are called business torts. Someone can file a claim if they experience interference with a contract or a prospective advantage. Or, if someone has violated their rights to privacy and publicity.

The Lanham Act (passed in 1946, amended in 1988)

This statute prohibits -- and provides punishment for -- false statements made by a business intended to hurt another business.

To win a case under this act, the plaintiff must prove three things: The defendant made false or misleading fact

statements about the plaintiffs business The defendant used the statements in

commercial advertising or promotion The statements created a likelihood of harm to

the plaintiff

Interference with Business Relations Interference with a contract exists if the plaintiff can

prove these elements: There was a contract between the plaintiff and a third party

and the defendant knew of the contract. The defendant induced the third party to breach the contract

or make performance impossible. There was injury to the plaintiff.

The defendant can justify the interference if he can prove one or more of these elements: He was protecting an existing economic interest. He was protecting a public interest. The existing contract could be terminated at will by either

party.

PresenterPresentation NotesInterference with a contract exists if the plaintiff can prove that there was a contract between the plaintiff and a third party and the defendant knew of the contract. That the defendant induced the third party to breach the contract or make performance impossible. And that there was injury to the plaintiff.

The defendant can justify the interference if he can prove that he was protecting an existing economic interest OR that he was protecting a public interest or that the existing contract could be terminated at will by either party.

Interference with Business Relations Interference with prospective advantage exists:

when there is a relationship which gives the plaintiff a reasonable expectation of economic advantage, even though no contract exists

when the defendant maliciously interferes and prevents the relationship from developing

The defendant can justify the interference if he can prove one or more of these elements: He was protecting an existing economic interest He was protecting a public interest He was simply competing for the same business in an

allowable business situation

Privacy and Publicity Intrusion (prying into someones private life) is a tort if a

reasonable person would find it offensive. Examples: wiretapping, stalking, peeping

Technology is creating new ways for a persons privacy to be exploited, and therefore creating a demand for new laws The Electronic Communications Privacy Act prohibits

unauthorized interception and disclosure of wire and electronic communication.

The Stored Communications Act, prohibits unauthorized access to a facility through which an electronic service is provided.

Commercial Exploitation is when a persons image or voice is used for commercial purposes without that persons permission.

PresenterPresentation NotesIntrusion or prying into someones private life is a tort if a reasonable person would find it offensive.For example, if your landlord taps your phone or an ex-girlfreind or boyfriend stalks you or peeps in your windows, this is intrusion. Technology is creating new ways for a persons privacy to be exploited, which has forced the need for new laws like the Electronic Communications Privacy Act. This act prohibits interception and disclosure of wire and electronic communication. And the Stored Communications Act, prohibits unauthorized access to a facility through which an electronic service is provided.Commercial Exploitation is when a persons image or voice is used for commercial purposes without that persons permission.

A wide variety of intended acts can have unintended consequences. With intentional torts, the defendant may not have intended to harm the plaintiff, but her deliberate actions have resulted in the alleged injury. Anticipating the harm that can result enables us to consider carefully the actions themselves.

Quotes of the Day

If thou dost marry, Ill give thee this plague for thy dowry; be thou as chaste as ice, as pure as snow, thou shall not

escape calumny. Hamlet, in William Shakespeares Hamlet, Act III, scene 1

It is perfectly monstrous the way people go about nowadays saying things behind ones

back that are absolutely true. Lord Henry, in Oscar Wildes The Picture of Dorian Gray

The End

Chapter 6Jane Doe and Nancy Roe v. Lynn MillsTort Means WrongSlide Number 4Slide Number 5Caudle v. BettsIntentional Tort - DefamationSlide Number 8Defamation (contd)Intentional Tort - False ImprisonmentIntentional Tort -- Intentional Tort --Intentional Tort --Slide Number 14Slide Number 15Slide Number 16Slide Number 17Slide Number 18Slide Number 19Slide Number 20Slide Number 21A wide variety of intended acts can have unintended consequences. With intentional torts, the defendant may not have intended to harm the plaintiff, but her deliberate actions have resulted in the alleged injury. Anticipating the harm that can result enables us to consider carefully the actions themselves.Quotes of the DayThe End