Personal Reflections on Intentional Tort

1. In late May 2013, I witnessed what I believe to be an assault, an intentional tort. One evening, after exiting a grocery store, I witnessed two men engaged in a verbal altercation across the street by a parking meter. As one turned away he suddenly spun around and raised his hand to the other, who moved behind the parking meter, using it as a barrier between him and the other man, who abruptly got into his car and drove away. As per the text, the elements of assault are as follows: 1. an attempt to make unconsented harmful or offensive contact and 2. the victim is apprehensive for his or her physical safety and 3. the threat of contact is imminent. The attacker’s swing at the victim was a deliberate attempt to cause him physical harm. The victim’s flinching and moving behind the parking meter should be sufficient proof that he was fearful for his physical safety as this action was classified as a reasonable standard under such heated circumstances. Finally, the threat of physical contact by the tortfeasor was imminent as the punch could have connected in a matter of seconds if he had chosen to complete it.

2. In March 2013 I witnessed what I believe to be a case of battery, an intentional tort. One afternoon while on a bus, I witnessed an older man of maybe sixty brushing into a younger man. After the bus driver told the so-called victim to “calm down” he became quiet, but a few stops later as people were unloading the younger man bent over an aisle and punched the older man in the face as he was sitting down before racing out the door. As per the text, the elements of battery are 1. unconsented physical contact and 2. offensive or harmful contact and 3. the tortfeasor’s intent to touch another person in an offensive or injurious manner. The punch in the face clearly qualifies as unconsented physical contact. The contact was offensive and harmful, evidenced by the pain and humiliation it caused. The tortfeasor clearly intended to hit the older man as evidenced by not only the punch but his deliberate bending over to reach him.

3. Around November 15th, 2012 I witnessed what I believe to be a case of white-collar crime fraud, an intentional tort. While at a friend’s home one morning the mail arrived, and with it a package he had purchased second hand on eBay that was supposed to contain a video game. He opened the package only to find that he’d been sent an empty case. After checking the package to make sure the game was not inside, he contacted the seller to tell him what had happened, but the seller only responded saying something to the effect of “enjoy your box.” As per the text, the elements of fraud are as follows: 1. intent to deceive by making a false representation of material fact and 2. the defrauder must know that the statements made are false and 3. the purpose of the false statements must be to entice the victim into giving the tortfeasor something of value and 4. the innocent party must justifiably rely on the misrepresentation and 5. the innocent party must be injured. The seller’s sarcastic response and refusal to redress the victim evidence his intent to deceive from the start. The aforementioned response and refusal similarly evidence the likelihood that he intended to deceive and deliberately misrepresented his product for that goal. The false product description was designed for the purpose of extracting money from someone else. The buyer had no reason to believe the seller was falsely representing his product as the buyer had a significant number of positive eBay sales references. Finally, the buyer suffered an economic injury in being left without his money nor the product he’d intended to purchase.

Work Cited

Okrent, Cathy J. Torts and Personal Injury Law. 4th ed. Clifton Park, NY: Delmar Cengage Learning, 2009. Print.