5 Introduction to the Intentional Torts: Protecting Property, Body, and Mind

1 Echoing the earlier distinctions between civil and criminal law, note that civil assault and battery are torts, dealt with in private law, which may allow the victim to seek money damage for their harms or to stop future harms by the assailant. Criminal assault and battery are crimes, dealt with in public law, which may allow the state or government to prosecute and penalize the assailant. It’s important to keep these distinct because the elements necessary to prove that the conduct was criminal differ from the inquiry into whether the conduct was tortious. Additionally, the remedies and the burden of proof differ.

2 The city and the railway company raise no question as to their joint liability, if there is any liability.

3 It is worth noting at the outset of your studies that tort law is capricious that way; often the same issue can come out differently in different jurisdictions or on the basis of minor factual diferences that seem as though they ought to be trivial rather than dispositive of the case. It frustrates students who would like for it to be more orderly or predictable. In looking for the rule on a given issue, casebooks sometimes give one rule for Virginia and a different rule for its neighboring state of North Carolina. As a law student, I recall finding this extremely frustrating; as a law professor, I try to put students on notice that this will be the case, and to explain how it reflects tort law’s commitment to resolution of certain issues at the community level, permitting jurisdictions, and lay decision making, on many importante issues.

5 The underlying legal reasoning for the doctrine is illustrated in this case: “If the servants of A with his cart run against another cart, wherein is a pipe of wine, and overturn the cart and spoil the wine, an action lieth against A. So where a carter’s servant runs his cart over a boy, action lies against the master for the damage done by this negligence: and so it is if a smith’s man pricks a horse in shoeing, the master is liable. For whoever employs another, is answerable for him, and undertakes for his care to all that make use of him. The act of a servant is the act of his master, where he acts by authority of the master.” Jones v Hart, 90 E.R. 1255 (Court of King’s Bench) 1703.

6 Toms’ relatives and landlord were also contacted by Calvary, but all declined permission to allow Calvary to host the event on their property.

7 Firework shooters must be certified in the State of Maryland. Applicants must submit a “Firework Shooter Testing and Permit Application” to the Office of the State Fire Marshal in order to “to possess, sell or use explosives of any kind in the State of Maryland.”

8 “Dean Thayer pointed out the error in the popular assumption that the rule of Rylands v. Fletcher makes the defendant liable for all consequences in fact resulting from his conduct. This is precisely what the rule of the case does not do; it makes [the] defendant liable … only for proximate consequences, not for remote consequences.” Fowler V. Harper, Liability Without Fault and Proximate Cause, 30 MICH. L.REV. 1001, 1005 (1932) (emphasis in original).

9 Under certain circumstances, causes of action may exist in cases involving fireworks liability under the theories of negligence or nuisance. See Crowley v. Rochester Fireworks Co., 183 N.Y. 353, 76 N.E. 470 (1906) (“[T]here may be negligence in the character of the fireworks used on a particular occasion as well as in the method of their discharge.”); Little v. Union Trust Co. of Maryland, 45 Md.App. 178, 183, 412 A.2d 1251, 1254 (1980) (discussing possible nuisance liability for shooting fireworks in the street).

10 In the petition for writ of certiorari, Toms states “This Court … can expand the factual application of this tort to instances where the sudden, abnormal noise of a fireworks display, adjacent to livestock, can create strict liability.”

11 Letter from John Adams to Abigail Adams, 3 July 1776, MASS. HIST. SOC’Y, www.masshist.org/digitaladams/archive/doc?id=L17760703 jasecond [https://perma.cc/P22L-DMRX].

12 Editor’s note: “Trespass” here is a reference to an older form of legal action involving a direct injury, and it does not necessarily or only refer to trespass in the ordinary sense in which you are probably familiar with it, meaning unauthorized entry onto someone else’s land. “Lies” here means “exists as a viable legal action.”

13 Editor’s note: This now is a reference to trespass in the ordinary sense of unauthorized entry on someone else’s land, which the law calls a “close.” 87 C.J.S. Trespass § 66. Here, the “close” is a reference to the property owned by the plaintiff, Swan.

14 A Black’s Law Dictionary—or Google—will help you cut through the Latin terms you’ll encounter in law school. If an unfamiliar term doesn’t obstruct your understanding, you might just keep reading without looking it up, and only look it up after you’ve read the case so that it doesn’t break your flow. However, I would strongly encourage you to look up a Latin phrase (or other term) if you’re still not sure what it means after reading the case. Here, “causa causans” means the primary or originating cause, the cause of the things (or even the causes) that follows that first cause. It’s used to trace damages back to an original source of liability.

15 https://www.officialdata.org/us/inflation/1905?amount=14322.50 Using a more complicated set of inputs, it could be considered $2,690,000 in relative income using 2019’s currency.

16 https://www.officialdata.org/canada/inflation/1935?amount=50

17 The underlying legal reasoning for the doctrine is illustrated in this case: “If the servants of A with his cart run against another cart, wherein is a pipe of wine, and overturn the cart and spoil the wine, an action lieth against A. So where a carter’s servant runs his cart over a boy, action lies against the master for the damage done by this negligence: and so it is if a smith’s man pricks a horse in shoeing, the master is liable. For whoever employs another, is answerable for him, and undertakes for his care to all that make use of him. The act of a servant is the act of his master, where he acts by authority of the master.” Jones v Hart, 90 E.R. 1255 (Court of King’s Bench) 1703.

18 White women and children would wait in this room to be protected from the hustle and bustle of the railroad station, apparently. Here, the husband has deposited his wife and children while he goes back out on the town on some sort of errand as they all await the train. At least in this railroad station, an African-American woman was employed to keep the waiting room clean and orderly.

19 The “assignments of error” mentioned here are the grounds on which the case is being appealed, namely, that the court below made errors that this appellate court should address (in the ways in which the appellant is seeking relief).

20 Editor’s note: “res gestae” means the things or circumstances relating to case at hand.

21 For example, the risks inherent in the simple process of taking a common blood sample are said to include hematoma, dermatitis, cellulitis, abscess, osteomyelitis. septicemia, endocarditis, thrombophlebitis, pulmonary embolism and death, to mention a few. (Harrison, Principles of Internal Medicine (5th ed. 1966) pp. 726, 1492, 1510-1514.) One commentator states that California law does not require that the “patient be told too much.” (Hagman, The Medical Patient’s Right to Know, supra, 17 U.C.L.A. L.Rev. 758, 766.)