Questions 1-3 are based on the following facts:
Al, a salesman, and his ten-year-old son, Bob, moved to a new neighborhood. Carl, Dave, and Ed, neighborhood children of Bob’s age, saw Bob riding his skateboard down the street and stopped him to see if he would be a “good sport.” They began to call him names and when Bob tried to leave, Carl put his foot on the skateboard, preventing him from leaving. Bob began to run home and Dave threw a stick at Bob which hit Frank, Al’s neighbor, and fell onto Al’s hedge. The three boys then threw rocks at Bob and one stone grazed Bob’s shoulder but did not injure him. Al came out and the children taunted him by calling “pig, pig, pig, pig.”
1. As to the stopping of the skateboard, for which of the following intentional torts is Carl most likely liable?
C. False imprisonment
D. Infliction of emotional distress
A. Assault results when the defendant intends to cause either offensive contact, or apprehension of offensive contact, induces (persuades) apprehension of such contact in the plaintiff.
Here, before Carl stopped the skateboard, he began to call Bob names; by calling him names he ethnically intended to cause apprehension of offensive contact; when he stopped the skateboard, he induced (persuaded) apprehension of such contact with the plaintiff, making him liable for Assault.
B. Battery occurs when the defendant intends to cause either unconsented offensive contact, or apprehension of unconsented offensive contact, causes unconsented offensive contact with the plaintiff, or to something closely associated with the plaintiff.
As to the stopping of the skateboard, when Carl intended to induce apprehension, he also caused unconsented offensive contact, unconsented offensive contact with something closely associated with the plaintiff (the skateboard), making him liable for Battery.
C. False imprisonment occurs when the defendant intentionally confines the plaintiff; the plaintiff is confined when his will to leave a place with fixed boundaries is overcome in a way which would similarly overcome the will of the reasonable person in the plaintiff’s situation.
Carl put his foot on the skateboard when Bob tried to leave, preventing him from leaving. Here Bob was prevented from leaving; Bob was confined, making Carl liable for False Imprisonment.
The answer for #1 is A, B. and C.
2. If Frank sues Dave for battery he will:
B. not recover, because Dave was aiming at Bob.
C. not recover, because Dave as a ten-year-old is not liable for his torts.
D. not recover, because Dave did not intend to hurt anyone.
Battery is an intentional and offensive touching of another without lawful justification.
Here, Dave threw a stick at Bob which hit Frank, Al’s neighbor, and fell onto Al’s hedge. Dave intentionally and offensively touched (hit) another (Frank) without justification, making Dave liable for Battery.
The answer for #2 is A, Dave will recover for battery.
3. If Bob sues Carl, Dave, and Ed for battery due to being hit by the rock he will:
B. not recover, because he does not know who threw the stone that hit him.
C. not recover, because he suffered no injury.
D. not recover, because he is presumed to have consented.
Battery is an intentional and unconsented offensive touching of another without lawful justification. In common law, Battery is concerned with the right to have one’s body left alone by others.
Here, the three boys (Carl, Dave, and Ed) threw rocks at Bob and one stone grazed Bob’s shoulder but did not injure him. One stone actually grazed Bob’s shoulder,but did not injure him. Because the ‘touch’ was intentional, unconsented offensive, even if there wasn’t injury, they have committed Battery. Bob will recover for Battery.
The answer for #3 is A.
4. Tye and Carl were students at Culver Junior High School.
In Latin class one morning, Carl decided to play a practical joke on Tye.
As Tye was about to sit down at his desk, Carl pulled Tye’s chair from behind.
As a result, Tye fell on his rump.
Although he was not injured, Tye was embarrassed by the incident.
If Tye asserts a claim against Carl, Tye will most likely
A. recover for assault
B. recover for battery
C. recover for intentional infliction of mental distress
D. recover for trespass to chattels
5. Passenger entered a subway car at the 42nd Street station. Since all of the seats were occupied, Passenger stood in the subway car and grabbed a pole to secure his balance. As the subway car was proceeding cross-town, Passenger glanced at a voloptuous blonde girl standing next to him. Suddenly, the subway car made an unexpected stop. Passenger momentarily lost his balance, and grabbed the blonde girl around the waist (to avoid falling). Once Passenger regained his balance, he removed his hands from the girl’s waist and grasped the pole again.
In a civil action instituted by the blonde girl against Passenger, he will most likely be found
A. liable for battery
B. liable, if Passenger mistakenly believed that the girl consented to the contact
C. not liable, since Passenger’s conduct was socially acceptable under the circumstances
D. not liable, since the girl was not harmed by the contact
Questions 6-8 are based on the following facts:
While relaxing poolside one Sunday afternoon, Dickie was struck by a golf ball driven by Marty, a 14-year-old boy, who was playing the 9th hole at the Pike Creek Golf Club. The fairway for the 9th hole was 65 feet wide and 437 yards long, with a dog-leg in an easterly direction. Between the fairway and Dickie’s property was a “rough” containing brush and low lying trees.
As Marty was approaching the green, he hit a towering shot which deflected off a tree, struck Dickie, bounced off his head and knocked a straw hat off of his girlfriend Patty’s head. Although the ball did not strike Patty herself, she became startled and fell from her beach chair, thus breaking her arm.
6. At trial plaintiff offered uncontested evidence that golf balls from the Club’s links regularly traversed onto his property two to three times a day. Which of the following statements is most accurate regarding the liability of the Pike Creek Golf Club/Marty for trespass?
A. Defendants are not liable, since they did not intentionally cause the golf ball(s) to traverse onto the plaintiff’s property.
B. Defendants would remain liable for the unpermitted intrusion of the golf ball(s) onto the plaintiff’s property.
C. Since the plaintiff should have reasonably anticipated that living next to a golf course would result in stray golf balls landing on his property, defendants would not be held liable.
D. Since the golf balls did not substantially interfere with the plaintiff’s use and enjoyment of his land, defendants would not be held liable.
7. Which of the following would be Dickie’s proper cause of action against Marty as a result of the golf ball hitting his head?
A. Assault but not battery
B. Battery but not assault
C. Assault and battery
D. Neither assault nor battery, since Marty did not intentionally cause Dickie to be struck
8. If Patty initiates a suit against Marty to recover damages for her broken arm, Patty will
A. recover for assault only
B. recover for battery only
C. recover for assault and battery
D. not recover
9. Dickie “Mulehorse” Nixon was the star fullback for Whittier College football team. After missing two practices, Nixon was “dropped” from the team by Archie Cox, the head football coach. Following his dismissal, Nixon met with Cox and asked if he could rejoin the team. Cox told Nixon that he was despised by the other players and under no circumstances could he return to the team. As Nixon was leaving Cox’s office very dejected, the coach then said to him, “Hope you decide to transfer, Mulehorse, everybody hates your guts around here”. Later that same evening, Nixon wrote a suicide note in which he stated, “Coach Cox is responsible for my despondency. If I can’t play football for Whittier, I don’t want to live.” After swallowing a bottle of Quaalude barbiturates, Nixon fell unconscious in his dormitory room. Moments later, Pat Checkers, Nixon’s roommate, entered the room and saw his limp body on the floor. Checkers read the suicide note and then attempted to administer aid. Failing to revive him, Checkers picked up Nixon and carried him to the college’s first aid center. Nixon received prompt medical attention and soon recovered from his drug overdose. Checkers, however, was less fortunate. He suffered a hernia caused by carrying Nixon’s 210 pound body across the campus grounds.
If Nixon asserts a claim against Cox to recover damages for his injuries, Nixon will most likely
A. prevail, if Cox intended to cause him to suffer emotional distress
B. prevail, because Cox’s remark did in fact cause Nixon to suffer emotional distress
C. not prevail, because Nixon’s drug overdose resulted from his own voluntary act
D. not prevail, unless Cox knew that Nixon was an extremely sensitive person
10. Dave Schultz was a professional hockey player for the Philadelphia Ruffians. One evening in a game between the Ruffians and the Pittsburgh Eskimos, Schultz got hit in the face with a hockey puck. Schultz was rendered temporarily unconscious and had to be taken to the dressing room on a stretcher. While in the dressing room, Schultz regained consciousness but he was in excruciating pain and discomfort. The puck fractured Schultz’s nose, blackened his eyes and knocked out three teeth.
As the team physician administered medical assistance, Bobby Clarke, the Ruffians’ trainer, entered the dressing room with his camera. Clarke often took pictures of the Ruffian players for his personal collection. Clarke placed a pillow under Schultz’s head and was about to take his picture when the supine athlete protested and told Clarke “get the hell out of here, I don’t want my picture taken.” Clarke took two pictures anyway.
If Schultz brings suit for tortious battery against Clarke, the plaintiff will likely
A. succeed, if Clarke’s act was offensive to Schultz
B. succeed, if Clarke’s act caused Schultz to suffer embarrassment or humiliation
C. not succeed, because Schultz did not suffer any injury
Delivering a high-quality product at a reasonable price is not enough anymore.
That’s why we have developed 5 beneficial guarantees that will make your experience with our service enjoyable, easy, and safe.
You have to be 100% sure of the quality of your product to give a money-back guarantee. This describes us perfectly. Make sure that this guarantee is totally transparent.Read more
Each paper is composed from scratch, according to your instructions. It is then checked by our plagiarism-detection software. There is no gap where plagiarism could squeeze in.Read more
Thanks to our free revisions, there is no way for you to be unsatisfied. We will work on your paper until you are completely happy with the result.Read more
Your email is safe, as we store it according to international data protection rules. Your bank details are secure, as we use only reliable payment systems.Read more
By sending us your money, you buy the service we provide. Check out our terms and conditions if you prefer business talks to be laid out in official language.Read more