Tort Law-Intentional Torts
Aside from the types of claims mentioned previously, there are several intentional torts that can be asserted. Those intentional torts consist of such claims as assault and battery, conversion, defamation, false imprisonment, fraud, malicious prosecution, invasion of privacy, trespass, and the intentional infliction of emotional distress. All these claims have specific elements that must be met and proved in order for a plaintiff to prevail.
A battery is simply an unwanted touching of one person by another. Conversion is the taking of a person’s property without that person’s consent. (Conversion in the civil system is similar to larceny in the criminal system.)
Defamation can come in either written (libel) or oral (slander) form and consists of making injurious statements about a person that are untrue. If the injurious statements involve an imputation of a criminal offense, involve moral turpitude, impute a contagious disease, impute unfitness to perform the duties of office, or include words that prejudice a person in his or her profession or trade, then they may be referred to as being defamatory per se.
If the alleged statement is not defamatory per se, then the plaintiff may have to prove what are called special damages in order to recover against the defendant. Special damages would come in the form of out-of-pocket expenses incurred as a result of those defamatory statements.
Example: If you are a surgeon and David calls you a butcher, that is a statement that is defamatory per se. You could assert a defamation claim against David even though you may not have incurred any special damages (any out-of-pocket expense as a result of the making of that statement).
Keep in mind that truth is always a complete defense to a defamation claim.
If, on the other hand, you are unemployed and Sarah calls you a crook, and as a result of making that comment you incur so much emotional distress that you seek psychiatric help, you may have a basis for a defamation claim against Sarah. Even though the comment made is not defamatory per se, the fact that you have incurred medical expenses as a result of Sarah making the comment about you satisfies the special damages requirement. It gives you the basis for a defamation claim against Sarah.
A battery is simply an unwanted touching of one person by another. Conversion is the taking of a person’s property without that person’s consent. (Conversion in the civil system is similar to larceny in the criminal system.)
Defamation can come in either written (libel) or oral (slander) form and consists of making injurious statements about a person that are untrue. If the injurious statements involve an imputation of a criminal offense, involve moral turpitude, impute a contagious disease, impute unfitness to perform the duties of office, or include words that prejudice a person in his or her profession or trade, then they may be referred to as being defamatory per se.
If the alleged statement is not defamatory per se, then the plaintiff may have to prove what are called special damages in order to recover against the defendant. Special damages would come in the form of out-of-pocket expenses incurred as a result of those defamatory statements.
Example: If you are a surgeon and David calls you a butcher, that is a statement that is defamatory per se. You could assert a defamation claim against David even though you may not have incurred any special damages (any out-of-pocket expense as a result of the making of that statement).
Keep in mind that truth is always a complete defense to a defamation claim.
If, on the other hand, you are unemployed and Sarah calls you a crook, and as a result of making that comment you incur so much emotional distress that you seek psychiatric help, you may have a basis for a defamation claim against Sarah. Even though the comment made is not defamatory per se, the fact that you have incurred medical expenses as a result of Sarah making the comment about you satisfies the special damages requirement. It gives you the basis for a defamation claim against Sarah.
