Battery and Privileges in Law

Podcast

Play an AI-generated podcast conversation about this lesson

Questions and Answers

What constitutes offensive contact according to case law?

Contact that causes emotional distress

Contact that offends a reasonable sense of personal dignity (correct)

Contact that is generally accepted in social situations

Contact that results in physical injury

Which case established that battery can be committed by intentionally blowing smoke on another person?

O'Brien v. Cunard Steamship

Fisher v. Carrousel Motor Hotel

McCracken v. Sloan

Leichtman v. WLW Jacor Communication, Inc. (correct)

What is one of the privileges to justify otherwise tortious conduct?

Necessity (correct)

Intention

Malice

Vindication

In regards to consent, which of the following is a crucial factor?

Consent must be given freely without fraud or coercion Signup and view all the answers

Which of these cases addressed the issue of medical consent and capacity?

O'Brien v. Cunard Steamship Signup and view all the answers

According to the principles of offensive contact, how can a reasonable person's sense of dignity be offended?

By contact that the actor knows is highly offensive Signup and view all the answers

Which of the following describes the ruling in Barton v. Bee Line, Inc.?

The trial court erred in finding consent Signup and view all the answers

What defense can be used in tort law when being attacked?

Self-Defense Signup and view all the answers

What was the ruling regarding the liability of the football player in the Cincinnati Bengals case?

The trial court erred in stating the player was not liable. Signup and view all the answers

In the case of Washburn v. Klara, what was the key issue regarding consent?

Consent authorized the surgery but not the additional injury. Signup and view all the answers

What did the court determine in Massingale v. Lee regarding the informed consent?

The doctor acted negligently despite signed consent. Signup and view all the answers

In the case of Robinson v. Cutchin, why did the court dismiss the battery claim?

The plaintiff failed to show malice as it was an extension of the procedure. Signup and view all the answers

Which of the following cases involved a lack of proper disclosure of risks leading to misdiagnosis?

Jandre v. Wisconsin IPFCF Signup and view all the answers

In Martin v. Richards, what threshold of risk disclosure was deemed necessary?

A 1 to 3 percent chance of developing a serious condition merits disclosure. Signup and view all the answers

What was the outcome of the case Hoofnel v. Segal regarding the signed consent form?

The court ruled in favor of the defendant based on the signed consent. Signup and view all the answers

What common theme can be observed in the consent-related cases discussed?

Most cases hinged on the plaintiff's understanding of the risks. Signup and view all the answers

What outcome did the court reach in the case of George Hospital regarding life-prolonging treatment against the patient's wishes?

The hospital was held liable for battery. Signup and view all the answers

In the case of In re Maria Isabel Duran, what was the critical factor that the court failed to uphold regarding the patient's wishes?

The court ignored a previously documented refusal of treatment. Signup and view all the answers

What was the court's determination in In re Fetus Brown about the mother's refusal of treatment?

The mother's refusal had to be honored for both her and the fetus. Signup and view all the answers

In the case of HCA v. Miller, what did the court rule regarding the parents' request about their fetus?

The hospital has discretion and does not have to follow parental directions. Signup and view all the answers

What significant evidence influenced the court's decision in Shindler v. Schiavo?

Evidence that the patient had expressed a desire not to prolong life artificially. Signup and view all the answers

In Jacobson v. Massachusetts, what was the central argument related to the smallpox vaccine?

Public health rights can override individual rights in emergencies. Signup and view all the answers

What precedence was established in Klaasen v. Trustees of Indiana University about the COVID-19 vaccine?

Public health officials can mandate vaccines in at-will work relationships. Signup and view all the answers

What was the outcome of the Madrigal v. Quilliigan case regarding informed consent for sterilization?

If consent was given freely, physicians may not face liability. Signup and view all the answers

Under what circumstances is an actor not privileged to defend himself against negligent conduct?

If the actor knows he can retreat safely Signup and view all the answers

What type of force is an actor privileged to use against a threat of death or serious bodily harm?

Force intended or likely to cause death or serious bodily harm Signup and view all the answers

If an actor believes he can safely retreat when attacked in his dwelling place, what privilege exists?

The privilege to use reasonable force only Signup and view all the answers

What must an actor reasonably believe to justify the use of deadly force?

He is in imminent danger of death or serious bodily harm Signup and view all the answers

What is a key condition under which the privilege of self-defense does not exist?

If the actor can safely retreat from danger Signup and view all the answers

In which scenario does an actor not have the privilege of lethal self-defense?

When he can retreat safely from the threat Signup and view all the answers

What type of defense is considered unreasonable if it exceeds the actor's belief of necessary force?

Force that causes serious bodily harm Signup and view all the answers

What is required for an actor to justifiably use self-defense against an intentional contact?

The actor must believe he is in imminent danger of harm Signup and view all the answers

What is the primary holding regarding personal rights in the case of Briney?

Personal rights are given a higher value than property rights. Signup and view all the answers

In the case of Ploof v. Putnam, what does necessity constitute?

A privilege to trespass. Signup and view all the answers

In Vincent v. Lake Erie Transportation Co., what liability arises even when an act is necessary?

The actor may still be liable for damages. Signup and view all the answers

Which of the following is NOT an element of assault as outlined under the Restatement (Second) of Torts?

Bodily Injury Signup and view all the answers

What principle did the Boy in military fatigues case (Bouton v. Allstate Insurance) illustrate regarding assault?

The reasonable person standard can absolve liability. Signup and view all the answers

Under which circumstances can an actor be liable for assault according to the Restatement of Torts?

If the actor has the intent to cause harmful or offensive contact. Signup and view all the answers

Which statement regarding conditional threats is true?

Conditional threats must still meet the elements of assault. Signup and view all the answers

What does the concept of 'imminent apprehension' entail in terms of assault liability?

The victim's recognition of an immediate threat of harmful or offensive contact. Signup and view all the answers

Study Notes

Battery

A bodily contact is offensive if it offends a reasonable sense of personal dignity
In Fisher v. Carrousel Motor Hotel, a manager snatched a plate from a NASA employee's hand and made a racist remark, the court determined the manager committed a battery
In Leichtman v. WLW Jacor Communication, Inc., a radio show host intentionally blew smoke on an anti-smoking advocate, the court held that blowing smoke can constitute a battery
In McCracken v. Sloan, a boss smoked in his office despite his employee being allergic to smoke - this case established the "glass cage" defense and was decided in 1979
A contact is offensive if it offends a reasonable sense of personal dignity, or if the contact is highly offensive to the other's unusually sensitive sense of personal dignity, and the actor knows that the contact will be highly offensive to the other

Privileges

Consent is willingness in fact for conduct to occur.
Consent can be a defense, or it can be part of the plaintiff's prima facie case
Consent is determined by several factors
- Capacity to consent
- Fraud or coercion involved
- Form contracts involved
- Whether the doctor explained the procedure and the alternatives and gave the patient a choice or was the patient asked to sign the form with little or no explanation?
In O'Brien v. Cunard Steamship, a doctor administered a small pox vaccine, the court held that the overt actions indicated consent and therefore no battery was committed.
In Barton v. Bee Line, Inc., a 15 year old claimed she was raped, the court held that the trial court erred by not finding the defendant liable because the victim lacked the capacity to consent.
In Bang v. Charles T. Miller Hospital, a patient had his spermatic cords cut during a procedure.
In Kennedy v. Parrott, a surgeon punctured the patient's ovary during an appendectomy, the court held that the surgeon was not liable for this mistake, which was within the standard of care.
In Hackbart v. Cincinnati Bengals, Inc., a football player was hit by an opponent during a game outside of the play, the court held that the opponent could be held liable in this instance but noted that athletes must be held to a standard of accepting some risk of injury.

Self-Defense

The Restatement (Second) of Torts outlines the privilege of self-defense in several sections:
- Section 63: Self-defense by Force Not Threatening Death or Serious Bodily Harm
- Section 64: Self-Defense Against Negligent Conduct
- Section 65: Self-Defense by Force Threatening Death or Serious Bodily Harm
- Section 70: Character and Extent of Force Permissible
In Courvoisier v. Briney, a man shot an intruder in the leg after he thought he was being attacked, the court held that the man could not be held liable for shooting the intruder because a person's safety is prioritized over property.

Necessity

In Ploof v. Putnam, a boat tied to a private dock was untied by the owner's employee, causing the boat to crash. The court held that necessity could be a privilege to trespass.
In Vincent v. Lake Erie Transportation Co., a ship was tied to a dock during a storm and damaged the dock when it was slammed against it. Even though the ship owner tied the ship to the dock out of necessity, they were still held liable for the damage.
In Mouse's Case, a boat started taking on water in a storm and the defendant threw luggage overboard to save the boat. This case demonstrates a possible case of necessity and the balancing of interests, even if it resulted in damages to the defendant.

Assault

The Restatement (Second) of Torts defines assault in several sections:
- Section 21: Assault
- Section 29: Apprehension of Imminent Contact
- Section 22: Attempt Unknown to the Other
- Section 30: Conditional Treat
- Section 31: Threat by Words
The reasonable person standard is a prescriptive standard for determining if assault has occurred.
In Brzoska, a dentist was known to be HIV positive and the court held he could be held liable for assault under this element of fear, as his status was a matter of public record.
The elements of an assault are:
- Intent
- Causation
- Imminent apprehension
In Bouton v. Allstate Insurance, a boy dressed in military fatigues went trick or treating. The owner shot and killed the boy thinking he was attacking him. The insurance companies were sued by the boy's family who argued that the boy was assaulted, but the court held that a reasonable person would not fear a trick or treaters actions in this case.
Legal Formalism and Legal Realism are legal schools of thought.

Studying That Suits You

Use AI to generate personalized quizzes and flashcards to suit your learning preferences.

Description

This quiz examines key legal concepts surrounding battery and privileges, highlighting landmark cases such as Fisher v. Carrousel Motor Hotel and Leichtman v. WLW Jacor Communication, Inc.. It also discusses how consent serves as a defense in legal scenarios. Test your understanding of offensive contact and personal dignity rights.