Offenses to Person

Get Started. It's Free
or sign up with your email address
Rocket clouds
Offenses to Person by Mind Map: Offenses to Person

1. Battery

1.1. Requires

1.1.1. Volitional Act

1.1.1.1. Must be completed with defendant's own free will

1.1.2. Intent to Cause Harmful or Offensive Contact

1.1.2.1. Intent is Two pronged

1.1.2.1.1. Purposefully

1.1.2.1.2. Knew with Substantial certainty (KWSC)

1.1.3. Contact

1.1.3.1. .Contact is the unwanted touching of the plaintiff by the defendant.

1.1.3.2. Contact can be indirect or direct

1.1.3.2.1. Indirect

1.1.3.2.2. Direct

1.2. Consequence

1.2.1. Harmful or offensive Contact of the Plaintiff

1.3. Model Law

1.3.1. To prove battery, The plaintiff must prove with a preponderance of the evidence, meaning more likely than not, that the defendant committed a volitional act -of his own free will- , intended to cause a harmful or offensive contact to the plaintiff and that they actually suffered as a result of the harmful or offensive contact by the defendant.

1.3.1.1. To intend is to purposefully act so that a harmful or offensive contact will occur or to know with substantial certainty that the action will cause a harmful or offensive contact

1.3.1.1.1. A harmful contact is a touching by the defendant that causes physical damage.

1.3.1.1.2. An offensive contact is an unwanted touching with , within a reasonable person's standard that the action was offensive

2. Assault

2.1. Requires

2.1.1. Volitional Act

2.1.2. Intent to cause the Apprehension of an Imminent Battery

2.1.2.1. Defendant must have the apparent and/or present ability to carry out the act or there is not Apprehension.

2.1.2.1.1. Apprehension is NOT fear, but the belief that the act will cause them harm.

2.1.2.2. Imminent means without delay or without barriers to prevent the action or without evasive maneuvers.

2.2. Consequence

2.2.1. Apprehension of an imminent harmful or offensive contact.

2.3. Model Law

2.3.1. To prove assault, The plaintiff must prove with a preponderance of the evidence, meaning more likely than not, that the defendant committed a volitional act -of his own free will- , intending to cause apprehension of an imminent harmful or offensive contact to the plaintiff and that they actually suffered apprehension as a result of the imminent harmful or offensive contact by the defendant

2.3.1.1. To intend is to purposefully act so that apprehension of an imminent harmful or offensive contact will occur or to know with substantial certainty that the action will cause apprehension of the imminent harmful or offensive contact

2.3.1.1.1. A harmful contact is a touching by the defendant that causes physical damage

2.3.1.1.2. An offensive contact is an unwanted touching with , within a reasonable person's standard that the action was offensive

3. False Imprisonment

3.1. Requires

3.1.1. Act of Confinement

3.1.1.1. The plaintiff must show that the defendant actually completed the act of confinement of his own free will.

3.1.1.1.1. The plaintiff must show that the defendant actually completed the act of confinement of his own free will.

3.1.1.1.2. A plaintiff is confined when they have no means of egress

3.1.1.1.3. Any length of time is sufficient to satisfy confinement. It is length of time that is used to determine damages

3.1.2. Confinement

3.1.2.1. The plaintiff must have suffered the false imprisonment for any period of time without a reasonable means of escape.

3.1.2.2. Awareness of confinement

3.1.2.2.1. The plaintiff must be conscious or aware of the confinement during the restraint period.

3.1.2.3. Methods of Confinement

3.1.2.3.1. Physical Barriers

3.1.2.3.2. Physical Force

3.1.2.3.3. Direct Threats of Force

3.1.2.3.4. Indirect Threats of Force

3.1.2.3.5. Failure to provide a means of escape

3.1.2.3.6. Invalid Use of Legal Authority

3.1.2.4. Invalid Confinement

3.1.2.4.1. Moral Pressure

3.1.2.4.2. Future Threats

3.2. Intent to Confine

3.2.1. The Plaintiff must show that the plaintiff purposefully or knew with substantial certainty that the act would result in the confinement of the plaintiff.

3.2.2. Motive is not needed to show confinement. The intent to confine is sufficient for Torts.

3.2.3. The Doctrine of Transferred Intent Applies

3.3. Consequence

3.3.1. The Consequence for false imprisonment is that the plaintiff suffers a confinement of any length in a bonded area set by the defendant

3.4. Model Law

3.4.1. To prove False Imprisonment, the plaintiff must show with a preponderance of the evidence that the defendant completed a volitional act intending to cause the confinement of the plaintiff, that the plaintiff was aware of the confinement and that the plaintiff suffered to confinement to an abounded area set forth by the defendant.

3.4.1.1. To prove confinement, the plaintiff must show that they were restrained or imprisoned in a bounded area set by the plaintiff.

3.4.1.2. To prove the defendant intended to falsely imprison the plaintiff, the plaintiff must show that the defendant purposefully or knew with substantial certainty that the confinement would occur.

3.4.1.3. To have suffered as part of the confinement, the plaintiff must show that any amount of time elapsed and that they had no egress. or resonable means of escape.

3.4.1.3.1. To have egress, the plaintiff must show that escape would have caused them undo embarrassment, harm if attempted or that a heroic action would have to occur.

4. Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress

4.1. Requires

4.1.1. Extreme and Outrageous Conduct

4.1.1.1. A conduct, or manner of behaving that would shock a reasonable person (Objective Standard)

4.1.1.1.1. exception to the objective standard

4.1.2. Intent to cause Severe Emotional Harm

4.1.2.1. The defendant must act with a purpose to cause severe emotional harm

4.1.2.2. the Defendant must have known with substantial certainty that the conduct would cause severe emotional harm

4.1.2.3. the defendant knew their behavior was reckless, meaning they knew the result and disregard the consequence, acting upon their desire to cause emotional harm.

4.1.3. The Plaintiff must suffer an emotional Harm

4.1.3.1. The Causal Nexus must be satisfied.

4.1.3.1.1. The plaintiff must show that the defendant's conduct actually caused the severe emotional distress.

4.2. Consequence

4.2.1. the plaintiff must suffer a severe emotional distress from the defendant's extreme and outrageous conduct conduct.

4.3. Model Law

4.3.1. To prove Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress, the plaintiff must show by a preponderance of the evidence, meaning more likely than not, that the defendant engaged in extreme and outrageous conduct Intending to cause the defendant severe emotional harm or recklessly continuing such conduct, that the severe emotional harm is a result of the defendant's conduct, and that the plaintiff had suffered a severe emotional distress.

4.3.1.1. To engage in extreme and outrageous conduct is to behave in a manner that would shock a reasonable person, except if the defendant targeted the sensitivities of the plaintiff, for which the defendant is still liable.

4.3.1.2. A defendant must intend or conduct themselves in a purposeful manner, or knew with a substantial certainty or recklessly continued their conduct causing the severe emotional distress

4.3.1.3. The plaintiff must also prove they have suffered from an emotional distress.

4.3.1.3.1. The causal nexus must be met, meaning the plaintiff must show that the defendant's conduct is the cause of their severe emotional distress