Tort Cases

Question	Answer
What is the Rule in Van Camp v McAfoos?	Where an essential element of the cause of action is missing, the question is not what may be shown under the pleading but whether a cause of action had been pled. P must show D was at fault or acted wrongfully (that is, D hurt her intentionally or negligently). An individual is liable for the harm he or she causes another only if the individual’s conduct is wrongful; causing harm without fault not is sufficient.
What is the holding in Snyder v Turk?	An offensive contact is a basis for battery.
What is the holding in Cohen v Smith?	Lack of consent is being deemed as offensive in battery when a person is not being unduly sensitive.
What is the holding in Garratt v Dailey?	In regards to the intentional tort of battery, the element of intent is satisfied if the defendant knows with a substantial certainty that his act will result in a harmful or offensive contact.
What is the holding in Polmatier v Russ?	An insane person may have an intent to invade the interests of another, even though his reasons and motives for forming that intention may be entirely irrational.
What is the holding in Baska v Scherzer?	The doctrine of transferred intent states that the tort of battery or of assault and battery may be committed, although the person struck or hit by the defendant is not the one whom he intended to strike or hit” (Restatement S16).

Resource summary

	Created by alicialee07 about 11 years ago