What You'll Learn

  • The purpose of tort law 4. A universal exam sequence
  • The three liability systems 5. Damages at a glance
  • The seven intentional torts

Educational information only; not legal advice. This article is a general study aid and should be checked against current authority and course materials.

1. What Tort Law Is Trying to Do

Resolve disputes peacefully

Civil adjudication replaces private retaliation with an orderly method of redress.

Deter wrongful conduct

Liability encourages reasonable behavior and accountability before the next injury occurs.

Compensate injured parties

Compensatory damages seek to restore the plaintiff as nearly as money can.

Vindicate protected interests

Nominal or other relief may confirm that bodily autonomy, possession, or reputation was invaded.

The outlines frame a tort around an act plus an injury. That formula changes by doctrine. Some intentional torts protect dignitary or possessory interests without requiring measurable loss. Negligence, by contrast, is not actionable without actual damage.

2. Choose the Correct Liability System

System What the plaintiff focuses on Typical question

Intentional tort The defendant desired the consequence or knew it was substantially certain. Did the defendant intend contact, apprehension, confinement, entry, or serious interference?

Negligence The defendant's act created an unreasonable risk and fell below the required standard of care. Would a reasonable person have taken a precaution?

Strict liability The activity, animal, or defective product triggers liability without proof of negligence. Is the harm within the danger that justifies strict liability?

Key Takeaway

Intentional torts, negligence, and strict liability use different prima facie elements and different defenses. A careful exam answer identifies the theory before discussing causation or damages.

3. The Seven Intentional Torts

Battery

Intentional harmful or offensive contact.

Assault

Intentional imminent apprehension of harmful or offensive contact.

False imprisonment

Intentional complete confinement with awareness or harm. IIED Intentional or reckless extreme conduct causing severe emotional distress.

Trespass to land

Intentional entry, remaining, or failure to remove a thing from land.

Trespass to chattels

Intentional interference that causes impairment, deprivation, or consequential harm.

Conversion

Serious dominion or control justifying payment of the chattel's full value.

4. Use One Exam Sequence

1 Identify the defendant's act and the protected interest invaded. 2 Classify the theory: intentional tort, negligence, or strict liability. 3 State and apply every element of the prima facie case. 4 Analyze actual cause and scope of liability when causation is required. 5 Identify legally recoverable harm and the available measure of damages. 6 Analyze privileges, comparative fault, assumption of risk, immunities, and other defenses.

Key Takeaway

A demolition company carefully uses explosives, but the blast wave damages a nearby garage. Intent may be absent and negligence may be unprovable. The activity may still trigger strict liability if blasting is treated as abnormally dangerous and the property damage is within the risk that makes blasting dangerous.

Common Mistake

Do not treat every injury as negligence. Contact can support battery; apprehension can support assault; confinement can support false imprisonment; and certain dangerous activities can create strict liability even when the defendant used care.

Primary Authorities

  • Restatement (Second) of Torts: intent and the intentional tort prima facie rules.

  • Brown v. Kendall (unintentional harm and the rise of negligence).

  • Spano v. Perini Corp. (strict liability for blasting-related harm).

Exam-ready conclusion

Torts analysis begins with classification. The same event may support more than one tort, and intentional torts are not mutually exclusive. Build each theory separately and then test defenses.