Plaintiff(14) VS Defendant(11) February 20th 1889
Fact: Two boys were in a same high school of the village of Waukesha.11 years old boy kicked another 14 years old boy which caused the boy never recovered the use of his limb. The former was sued by the latter for $2800. Issue: whether a person who unintentionally hurt another person is liable for the harm through intentional harm. Holdings: the jury rendered a verdict for the plaintiff of $2800. Rationale: the touch was the exciting or remote cause of the destruction of the bone. The case was a case of torts and it related to the assult and battery which the defendant should pay money for the plaintiff. The defendant has no proof of any other hurt, and the medical testimony seems to have been agreed that this touch or kick was the exciting cause of the injury to the plaintiff.
Plaintiff Ralph Edward DAVIS VS Defendant Walter Calvin WHITE ,Jr. September 10,1977
Facts : White had obtained a gun in anticipation of shooting Tipton in an argument ,but missed and shot Davis in the stomach who was washing cars in front of his mother’s house on Fairmont Avenue in Richmond ,Virginia. Issue: whether an action based upon a willful and malicious injury by the debtor to another person is nondischargeable in bankruptcy. Holdings: the debt resulting from that act is nondischargeable in bankruptcy. Rationale: Every person is liable for the direct ,natural and probable consequence of his acts, and that every one doing an unlawful act is responsible for all of the consequential results of that act. The evidence here clearly show that the shooting was a wrongful act intentionally done and Davis’s injuries resulted from that act. And the debts results from that act. If one intentionally commits an assault or battery at another and by mistake strikes a third person, he is guilty of an assault and battery of the third person.
Plaintiff Dan R.CULLISON vs Defendant Ernest MEDLEY February 2,1986
Fact: Cullison encountered 16-year-old Sandy in a Linton, Indiana, grocery store parking lot and invited her to his home. Sandy didn’t come alone ,instead father Ernest and other family members accompanied her. He was berated and felt threatened since then. Increase fear from that incident lead him to serious psychological problems and affect his normal life. Issue: were the actions of threatening sufficient for reasonable people to apply battery. Holdings: It is error for the trial court to enter summary judgment ,which means that the appellant will get another trial. Rationale: Ernest kept grabbing at the pistol as if he were going to take it out, which gives Cullison’s the apprehension of being shot or injured an assault constitutes a touching of the mind, if not of the body. The tort invades the plaintiff’s mental peace.
Plaintiff John Robert DICKENS (31) vs Defendant Earl V. PURYEAR and Ann Brewer Puryear (18) April 2ed 1975
Fact: Dickens was beat into semi-consciousness and threatened to leave the state of North Carolina after lured into rural Johnston county by defendants, husband and wife .Ann Puryear and Earl Puryear appoint four men to inflict assault on him. Dickens then filed his complaint on 31 March 1978 for his physical injury and emotional distress. Issue: whether a threat or attempt to show violence constitutes assault. Holdings: plaintiff’s recovery for injuries ,mental or physical, caused by these actions would be barred by the one-year statute of limitations. Rationale: ordinarily mere words, unaccompanied by some act apparently intended to carry the threat into execution, do not put the other in apprehension of an imminent bodily contact ,and so cannot make the actor liable for an assault.
Plaintiff Eckert vs Long Island R.Co. November 26 1867
Fact: The deceased ,Henry Eckert, successfully saved a child near the main track but was...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document