The document outlines a series of legal scenarios involving intentional torts such as assault, battery, and false imprisonment, detailing actions by various individuals including neighborhood children and adults. It explores specific incidents and their legal implications, such as the liability of children for their actions and the consequences of practical jokes. The document presents hypothetical lawsuits and discussions about recovery for injuries and emotional distress resulting from these actions.

1. Questions 1-3 are based on the following facts:
Al, a salesman, and his ten-year-old son, Bob, moved to a new
neighborhood. Carl, Dave, and Ed, neighborhood children of
Bob's age, saw Bob riding his skateboard down the street and
stopped him to see if he would be a "good sport.” They began to
call him names and when Bob tried to leave, Carl put his foot
on the skateboard, preventing him from leaving. Bob began to
run home and Dave threw a stick at Bob which hit Frank, Al’s
neighbor, and fell onto Al’s hedge. The three boys then threw
rocks at Bob and one stone grazed Bob's shoulder but did not
injure him. Al came out and the children taunted him by calling
"pig, pig, pig, pig."
1. As to the stopping of the skateboard, for which of the
following intentional torts is Carl most likely liable?
A. Assault
B. Battery
C. False imprisonment
D. Infliction of emotional distress
A.
Assault results when the defendant intends to cause either
offensive contact, or apprehension of offensive contact, induces
(persuades) apprehension of such contact in the plaintiff.
Here, before Carl stopped the skateboard, he began to call Bob
names; by calling him names he ethnically intended to cause
apprehension of offensive contact; when he stopped the
skateboard, he induced (persuaded) apprehension of such
contact with the plaintiff, making him liable for Assault.
B.

2. Battery occurs when the defendant intends to cause either
unconsented offensive contact, or apprehension of unconsented
offensive contact, causes unconsented offensive contact with
the plaintiff, or to something closely associated with the
plaintiff.
As to the stopping of the skateboard, when Carl intended to
induce apprehension, he also caused unconsented offensive
contact, unconsented offensive contact with something closely
associated with the plaintiff (the skateboard), making him liable
for Battery.
C.
False imprisonment occurs when the defendant intentionally
confines the plaintiff; the plaintiff is confined when his will to
leave a place with fixed boundaries is overcome in a way which
would similarly overcome the will of the reasonable person in
the plaintiff’s situation.
Carl put his foot on the skateboard when Bob tried to leave,
preventing him from leaving. Here Bob was prevented from
leaving; Bob was confined, making Carl liable for False
Imprisonment.
The answer for #1 is A, B. and C.
2. If Frank sues Dave for battery he will:
A. recover.
B. not recover, because Dave was aiming at Bob.
C. not recover, because Dave as a ten-year-old is not liable for
his torts.
D. not recover, because Dave did not intend to hurt anyone.

3. Battery is an intentional and offensive touching of another
without lawful justification.
Here, Dave threw a stick at Bob which hit Frank, Al’s neighbor,
and fell onto Al’s hedge. Dave intentionally and offensively
touched (hit) another (Frank) without justification, making
Dave liable for Battery.
The answer for #2 is A, Dave will recover for battery.
3. If Bob sues Carl, Dave, and Ed for battery due to being hit by
the rock he will:
A. recover.
B. not recover, because he does not know who threw the stone
that hit him.
C. not recover, because he suffered no injury.
D. not recover, because he is presumed to have consented.
Battery is an intentional and unconsented offensive touching of
another without lawful justification.
In common law,
Battery is concerned with the right to have one's body left alone
by others.
Here, the three boys (Carl, Dave, and Ed) threw rocks at Bob
and one stone grazed Bob's shoulder but did not injure him. One
stone actually grazed Bob’s shoulder,
but did not injure him. Because the ‘touch’ was intentional,
unconsented offensive, even if there wasn’t injury, they have
committed Battery. Bob will recover for Battery.
The answer for #3 is A.
4. Tye and Carl were students at Culver Junior High School.

4. In Latin class one morning, Carl decided to play a practical joke
on Tye.
As Tye was about to sit down at his desk, Carl pulled Tye’s
chair from behind.
As a result, Tye fell on his rump.
Although he was not injured, Tye was embarrassed by the
incident.
If Tye asserts a claim against Carl, Tye will most likely
A. recover for assault
B. recover for battery
C. recover for intentional infliction of mental distress
D. recover for trespass to chattels
5. Passenger entered a subway car at the 42nd Street station.
Since all of the seats were occupied, Passenger stood in the
subway car and grabbed a pole to secure his balance. As the
subway car was proceeding cross-town, Passenger glanced at a
voloptuous blonde girl standing next to him. Suddenly, the
subway car made an unexpected stop. Passenger momentarily
lost his balance, and grabbed the blonde girl around the waist
(to avoid falling). Once Passenger regained his balance, he
removed his hands from the girl’s waist and grasped the pole
again.
In a civil action instituted by the blonde girl against Passenger,
he will most likely be found
A. liable for battery
B. liable, if Passenger mistakenly believed that the girl
consented to the contact

5. C. not liable, since Passenger’s conduct was socially acceptable
under the circumstances
D. not liable, since the girl was not harmed by the contact
Questions 6-8 are based on the following facts:
While relaxing poolside one Sunday afternoon, Dickie was
struck by a golf ball driven by Marty, a 14-year-old boy, who
was playing the 9th hole at the Pike Creek Golf Club. The
fairway for the 9th hole was 65 feet wide and 437 yards long,
with a dog-leg in an easterly direction. Between the fairway and
Dickie’s property was a “rough” containing brush and low lying
trees.
As Marty was approaching the green, he hit a towering shot
which deflected off a tree, struck Dickie, bounced off his head
and knocked a straw hat off of his girlfriend Patty’s head.
Although the ball did not strike Patty herself, she became
startled and fell from her beach chair, thus breaking her arm.
6. At trial plaintiff offered uncontested evidence that golf balls
from the Club’s links regularly traversed onto his property two
to three times a day. Which of the following statements is most
accurate regarding the liability of the Pike Creek Golf
Club/Marty for trespass?
A. Defendants are not liable, since they did not intentionally
cause the golf ball(s) to traverse onto the plaintiff’s property.
B. Defendants would remain liable for the unpermitted intrusion
of the golf ball(s) onto the plaintiff’s property.
C. Since the plaintiff should have reasonably anticipated that
living next to a golf course would result in stray golf balls
landing on his property, defendants would not be held liable.
D. Since the golf balls did not substantially interfere with the
plaintiff’s use and enjoyment of his land, defendants would not
be held liable.
7. Which of the following would be Dickie’s proper cause of
action against Marty as a result of the golf ball hitting his head?

6. A. Assault but not battery
B. Battery but not assault
C. Assault and battery
D. Neither assault nor battery, since Marty did not intentionally
cause Dickie to be struck
8. If Patty initiates a suit against Marty to recover damages for
her broken arm, Patty will
A. recover for assault only
B. recover for battery only
C. recover for assault and battery
D. not recover
9. Dickie “Mulehorse” Nixon was the star fullback for Whittier
College football team. After missing two practices, Nixon was
“dropped” from the team by Archie Cox, the head football
coach. Following his dismissal, Nixon met with Cox and asked
if he could rejoin the team. Cox told Nixon that he was despised
by the other players and under no circumstances could he return
to the team. As Nixon was leaving Cox’s office very dejected,
the coach then said to him, “Hope you decide to transfer,
Mulehorse, everybody hates your guts around here”. Later that
same evening, Nixon wrote a suicide note in which he stated,
“Coach Cox is responsible for my despondency. If I can’t play
football for Whittier, I don’t want to live.” After swallowing a
bottle of Quaalude barbiturates, Nixon fell unconscious in his
dormitory room. Moments later, Pat Checkers, Nixon’s
roommate, entered the room and saw his limp body on the floor.
Checkers read the suicide note and then attempted to administer
aid. Failing to revive him, Checkers picked up Nixon and
carried him to the college’s first aid center. Nixon received
prompt medical attention and soon recovered from his drug
overdose. Checkers, however, was less fortunate. He suffered a
hernia caused by carrying Nixon’s 210 pound body across the

7. campus grounds.
If Nixon asserts a claim against Cox to recover damages for his
injuries, Nixon will most likely
A. prevail, if Cox intended to cause him to suffer emotional
distress
B. prevail, because Cox’s remark did in fact cause Nixon to
suffer emotional distress
C. not prevail, because Nixon’s drug overdose resulted from his
own voluntary act
D. not prevail, unless Cox knew that Nixon was an extremely
sensitive person
10. Dave Schultz was a professional hockey player for the
Philadelphia Ruffians. One evening in a game between the
Ruffians and the Pittsburgh Eskimos, Schultz got hit in the face
with a hockey puck. Schultz was rendered temporarily
unconscious and had to be taken to the dressing room on a
stretcher. While in the dressing room, Schultz regained
consciousness but he was in excruciating pain and discomfort.
The puck fractured Schultz’s nose, blackened his eyes and
knocked out three teeth.
As the team physician administered medical assistance, Bobby
Clarke, the Ruffians’ trainer, entered the dressing room with his
camera. Clarke often took pictures of the Ruffian players for his
personal collection. Clarke placed a pillow under Schultz’s head
and was about to take his picture when the supine athlete
protested and told Clarke “get the hell out of here, I don’t want
my picture taken.” Clarke took two pictures anyway.
If Schultz brings suit for tortious battery against Clarke, the
plaintiff will likely
A. succeed, if Clarke’s act was offensive to Schultz
B. succeed, if Clarke’s act caused Schultz to suffer
embarrassment or humiliation

8. C. not succeed, because Schultz did not suffer any injury