tort-law(美国侵权法).-1-doc.doc

Tort LawTort law is a body of law that deals with civil wrongs, except those that arise from contract problems. The purpose of tort law is to compensate an injured party through the award of damages for the injuries incurred during a tortious act. Categories There are three broad categories of torts: 1. Intentional torts: 2. negligence 3. strict liability1. Intentional torts: Intentional torts are ones where the defendant desires to bring about a particular result. Intentional torts include actions that the layperson often associates with criminal law but are also covered by tort law. The main intentional torts against persons are: a. battery. b. assault. c. false imprisonment. d. intentional infliction of emotional distress. The main intentional torts against property are: a. trespass to land. b. trespass to chattels. c. conversion2. Negligence: The defendant has not intended to bring about a certain result, but has merely behaved carelessly. There are no individually-named torts in this category, merely the general concept of “negligence.“ (generic tort)3. Strict liability: The defendant is held liable even though he did not intend to bring about the undesirable result, and even though he behaved with utmost carefulness. INTENTIONAL TORTS Assault Battery False imprisonment Intentional infliction of emotional distress Trespass to land Trespass to chattels, and Conversion Assault and battery Assault and battery are intentional torts, meaning that the defendant actually intends to put the plaintiff in fear of an imminent battery, or intends to wrongfully touch the plaintiff. The wrongful touching need not inflict physical injury, and may be indirect. (contact through a thrown stone, spitting)Assault Assault occurs when the defendant's acts intentionally cause the victim's reasonable apprehension of immediate harmful or offensive contact. In other words, the defendant has committed the tort of assault if he has intentionally caused the plaintiff to think that she will be subjected to a harmful or offensive contact. The interest being protected is plaintiff's interest in freedom from apprehension of the contact; thus the tort can exist even if the contact itself never occurs. Apprehension: The victim must perceive that harmful or offensive contact is about to happen to him. Imminent Harmful or Offensive Contact: For assault to be actionable the victim's apprehension must be of imminent harmful or offensive contact. “Words alone“ rule: Ordinarily, words alone are not sufficient, by themselves, to give rise to an assault. Normally there must be some overt act – a physical act or gesture by defendant – before plaintiff can claim to have been assaulted.Castiglione v. Galpin, 325 So.2d 725 (1976) Plaintiffs, sewerage and water board employees, brought suit for damages resulting from an alleged assault in which defendant allegedly pointed a shotgun at them after being informed that his water would be turned off because of nonpayment of a water bill. The Civil District Court for the Parish of Orleans rendered judgment in favor of each plaintiff in the sum of $750, and defendant appealed. Holding: The Court of Appeal held that where defendant threatened plaintiffs with bodily harm in the event they turned the water off and where defendant had a shotgun at the time, whether gun remained on defendant's lap or was pointed at plaintiffs, plaintiffs were in reasonable apprehension of receiving a battery, and thus defendant was liable for assault; that the award to each plaintiff in the sum of $750 was not excessive.Battery Battery occurs when the defendant’s acts intentionally cause harmful or offensive contact with the victim’s person. Accidental contact, by contrast, must be analyzed under negligence or strict liability. Harmful or Offensive Contact: Battery encompasses either harmful or offensive contact. Even trivial offensive contact can constitute a battery. An offensive touching can constitute a battery even if it does not cause injury, and could not reasonably be expected to cause injury. Mohr v. Williams, 104 N.W. 12 (Minn. 1905). P consults D, an ear doctor, about her right ear. She consents to an operation on that ear, but does nothing about her left ear. During the operation, D discovers that the left ear (but not the right ear) needs surgery, and performs it. Held, the surgery on the left ear was an unauthorized, offensive contact, and constituted battery even though it was not in fact harmful to P's health. Reasonableness standard for “offensive“ contact: In determining whether a particular contact is “offensive,“ the standard is not whether the particular plaintiff was offended, but whether “an ordinary person not unduly sensitive as to his dignity“ would have been offended. Extends to personal effects: A battery may be committed not only by a contact with the plaintiff's body but also by a contact。