Preview

Explain The Ways In Which Torts Protect Against Intentional Interference

Good Essays
Open Document
Open Document
535 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
Explain The Ways In Which Torts Protect Against Intentional Interference
1. Which torts protect against the intentional interference with persons?
The torts that protect against the intentional interference are the following: Assault which is an intentional, unexcused act that creates in another person a reasonable apprehension or fear of im-mediate harmful or offensive contact. Battery, that is an unexcused, harmful, or offensive physical contact intention¬ally performed. False imprisonment is the intentional confinement or restraint of another person without justifi¬cation. Infliction of emotional distress is an intentional act that amounts to extreme and outrageous conduct re¬sulting in severe emotional distress to another. Defamation is wrongfully hurting another’s reputation is defamation. (Doing so orally is slander; doing it in writing or in a form of communication that has the poten¬tially harmful qualities characteristic of writing is libel.) Invasion of privacy which means using a person’s name or pic¬ture or other likeness for commercial purposes without permission; intruding into an individual’s affairs or seclusion; publishing information that places a person in a false light; publicly disclosing private facts
…show more content…
Then, self-defense when an individual defending his or her life or physical well-being can use whatever force is rea¬son¬ably necessary to prevent harmful contact. “Whatever force is reasonably necessary” is whatever force the in¬dividual believes is about to be used against him or her. Force cannot be used once danger has passed and cannot be used in revenge. Defense of others when an individual can act to defend others who are in danger to the same extent that he or she can act in self-protection. Defense of property when defend property, individuals can use reasonable force—which does not include force that is likely to cause death or great bodily

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Good Essays

    NRA Arguments

    • 336 Words
    • 2 Pages

    - Court approval of common law rule that a person 'may repel force by force' in selfdefense and concluded that when attacked a person 's as entitled to stand his ground and meet any attack made upon him with a deadly weapon, in such a way and with such force' as needed to prevent 'great bodily injury or death's'.…

    • 336 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Analysis/Reasoning: The defendant couldn’t justify using self-defense because evidence shows that he was the aggressor in the situation. He is the reason that the situation escalated to the point where it did.…

    • 433 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    A person's right to self defense begins at the moment the person reasonably believes that he or she is facing deadly force and reasonably…

    • 218 Words
    • 1 Page
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Better Essays

    References: LexisNexis, (2012). Part a. intentional torts and privileges chapter 1 intentional interferences with persons or property. Retrieved from website: http://www.lexisnexis.com/lawschool/study/outlines/html/torts/index.asp…

    • 847 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    CJS 220: Legal Defense

    • 371 Words
    • 2 Pages

    If reasonable force us used against an individual and there is a threat of imminent bodily harm or death, and the individual defends themselves, that person may be acquitted of first-degree murder. To argue perfect self-defense, and…

    • 371 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    Self-defense: To assert this doctrine, the use of self-defense must be both necessary to avoid an imminent deadly attack and the force used must be both necessary and reasonable to avoid that deadly attack. No force can be used merely in retaliation or for revenge.…

    • 1409 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    An intentional tort is a person deliberately causing harm or loss to another person. Examples are trespassing, causing a nuisance and defaming are intentional torts.…

    • 1189 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    physical injury to others. It was found that use of deadly force to prevent escape is…

    • 597 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Majority of the fifty states have one of two doctrines that articulate the use of physical force when it comes to self-defense and use of deadly force. The first being Castle Doctrine and the second being “stand your ground”. I will explain what these two ideas are and how they are viewed in the bill of some of the states that have adopted them and what are the differences in the two.…

    • 899 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Emotional/ Psychological abuse: Emotional/psychological abuse may involve threats or actions to cause mental or physical harm; humiliation; violation.…

    • 3231 Words
    • 10 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Tort Outline

    • 9959 Words
    • 40 Pages

    1) Introduction a) Definition – A tort is a civil wrong, other than breach of contract, for which the law provides a remedy. A person who breaches a tort duty (i.e., a duty to act in a manner that will not injure another person) has committed a tort and may be liable in a lawsuit brought by a person injured because of that tort. Torts is a fault-based system. b) Purposes of tort law: (1) to provide a peaceful means for adjusting the rights of parties who might otherwise “take the law into their own hands”; (2) to deter wrongful action; (3) to encourage socially responsible behavior; and, (4) to restore injured parties to their original condition, insofar as the law can do this, by compensating them for their injury. 2) Intentional Torts a) Assault, battery, false imprisonment, trespass to chattels, and trespass to land. b) Intent i) Meaning of intent: There is no general meaning of “intent” when discussing intentional torts. For each individual tort, you have to memorize a different definition of “intent.” All that the intentional torts have in common is that D must have intended to bring about some sort of physical or mental effect upon another person. (1) No intent to harm: The intentional torts are generally not defined in such a way as to require D to have intended to harm the plaintiff. (Example: D points a water gun at P, making it seem like a robbery, when in fact it is a practical joke. If D has intended to put P in fear of imminent harmful bodily contact, the intent for assault…

    • 9959 Words
    • 40 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Self-Defense means the defense of one's person or interests, especially through the use of physical force. Self-Defense involves when…

    • 626 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    Cja 354: Criminal Capacity

    • 1411 Words
    • 6 Pages

    115). When one has committed an act of violence, he or she naturally wants to justify the reasons. For many who commit a criminal act the best defense is justification. According to the author, some examples of justification can be, “self-defense, necessity, and defense of others (Schmalleger, 2010, pg. 116). Self-defense is when “a person has fundamental right to protect his or her self and that to rationally safeguard oneself from an illegal assault is a natural response when faced with a threatening situation” (Schmalleger, 2010, pg. 119). Necessity is a claim made by the defense, in which, “the defendant believed it was necessary to behave illegally to prohibit or deter a greater damage or injury” (Schmalleger, 2010, pg. 116). The defense of others occurs when one person defends another who appears to be in harm’s way (Schmalleger, 2010, pg. 126). However, as the author states, “defense of others is sometimes called “defense of a third person,” is circumscribed in some jurisdictions by the alter ego rule” (Schmalleger, 2010, pg. 126). The defense of others can be tricky because it does not mean one can intervene in an altercation of one’s friend when that friend started the altercation itself. The alter ego rule is accepted in some jurisdictions but not in others. The alter ego rule, as stated by Schmalleger (2010), is that “some jurisdictions will hold that an individual can solely protect a third party under certain conditions and solely to the degree in which the third party could perform for his or her own benefit” (pg. 126). For example, the state of Texas, based on the Model Penal Code ignores acknowledgement this rule by allowing an individual to defend another person if, “he or she has a rational…

    • 1411 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    Law and Ground Laws

    • 716 Words
    • 3 Pages

    The law of “Stand Your Ground” deals with a self-defense law which is for giving the individual rights for making use of deadly force which are for defending themselves without any kind of requirement of evading or retreating from any dangerous situation. Stand Your Ground is a law which places non obligation at all on the potential victims of any crime for retreating and calling the law enforcement personnel.…

    • 716 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Stand Your Ground Law

    • 1681 Words
    • 7 Pages

    In Nevada the justification of self-defense can only be used if you are not the original aggressor. As well as the other states, it says that the Stand Your Ground law can be used if you are at a place where you have the right to be in, you are not breaking the law and you have reason to believe your life is in danger. The Castle Doctrine in Nevada includes other several requirements such as the force used must be immediately necessary, must be in good faith, and must be a reasonable response to the aggressor's actions. (Gun Laws 101) Also the Castle doctrine specifies that the use of deadly force must be while protecting oneself from immediate threat of; rape, kidnapping, serious injury, or death. Nevada allows the doctrine to be extended to ones place of work. As well as allows no duty to retreat inside one’s home or place of…

    • 1681 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Powerful Essays