Case Brief: Garratt v. Dailey and the Issue of Battery

-

 


Citation:

Garratt v. Dailey, 279 P.2d 1091 (Wash. 1955)

Facts:

Defendant, Brian Dailey, was visiting with Naomi Garratt, sister of the plaintiff, Ruth Garratt. The plaintiff claims that she had intentions of walking into the backyard, where Brian and Naomi were present, in order to speak with Naomi. As the plaintiff was about to sit down in a lawn chair, it is alleged that the defendant pulled the chair out from under the plaintiff, causing her to sustain a hip fracture and other injuries. According to the defendant’s testimony, initially the chair was moved for him to sit in, but when he realized that the plaintiff was about to take a seat in said chair, he attempted to move the chair back into its original position in order to allow the plaintiff to sit within it.

Procedural History:

The plaintiff sues defendant for damages on the grounds of battery. The trial court entered judgement in favor of the defendant. However, the plaintiff appealed, and the supreme court remanded for a possible new determination.

Issue:

Did the defendant have an established intention and sufficient knowledge of potential damage or injury to the plaintiff in order for there to be a legitimate charge of battery?

Rule:

The law of battery requires that the actor have an intention to do harm or bring about offensive contact. The act must be done for the purpose of causing harm or with knowledge on the part of the actor that such contact or apprehension is substantially certain to be produced.

Analysis:

The trial court found that the defendant was attempting to move the chair toward the plaintiff to aid her in sitting down in the chair. Without any substantial evidence, the plaintiff failed to prove that the defendant’s actions were deliberate. Therefore, a lack of malicious intention was found on the side of the defendant.

Conclusion:

Though the trial courts found the defendant not guilty of committing battery, the supreme court remanded for clarification, with instructions to make definite findings on the issue of whether the defendant knew, with substantial certainty, that the plaintiff would attempt to sit down in the chair, which was moved, and to change the judgment if the court found that the defendant had such knowledge.


Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Scenario: Minnesota Law (w/ Case Briefs, Statute Explanation, and Table of Authorities)

-
Image
Scenario The managing partner at your Minnesota law firm wants you to research and provide information concerning a minor’s lack of capacity to enter into a binding contract. She wants you to locate the following three Minnesota cases, as well as a fourth Minnesota case on the matter. 1. Ramsey Cnty. v. Guardian Ad Litem, 853 N.W.2d 813 (Minn. Ct. App. 2014). 2. Winter v. Skoglund, 404 N.W.2d 786 (Minn. 1987). 3. O'Brien Ent. Agcy. v. Wolfgramm, 407 N.W.2d 463 (Minn. Ct. App. 1987). She also wants you to locate the following two statutes and explain what a defendant is required to demonstrate concerning a minor’s lack of capacity. 1. MINN. STAT. ANN. § 645.45 (West 2016). 2. MINN. STAT. ANN. § 524.2-501 (West 2016). After you have located those four cases and two statutes, please provide one case brief for each case, for a total of four case briefs. Also, please provide an explanation for each statute. Minnesota Case Briefs and Statute Breakdown Citation: Ramsey Cnty. v. Guardi...
Read more

Posner's Critique of the Bluebook (w/ In-Text Bluebook Citations)

-
Image
  In his thorough analysis of the Bluebook, Posner presents us with an overall solid and convincing critique of the pedantic rules and regulations that encompass legal writing. He gives us two main reasons why modern legal writing needs a reformation, and why the Bluebook needs a new and improved successor. These two main reasons, or critiques, include the tedious rules enforced upon legal citation and the overall style enforced upon legal writing in general. Posner's strongest argument against the Bluebook revolves around the nature of its legal citation rules, which is broken down into smaller parts. First, Posner critiques the Bluebook for enforcing a rule that forces the writer to abbreviate the name of an author of an article or book down to their last name. Richard A. Posner,  Goodbye to the Bluebook , 53 U.Chi.L.Rev. 1343, 1345 (1986). He believes that the full name of the author should be written to avoid confusion, since many authors shar...
Read more

Case Brief: Hackbart v. Cincinnati Bengals, Inc. and the Issue of Tort Liability

-
Image
  Citation: Hackbart v. Cincinnati Bengals, Inc ., 601 F.2d 516 (10th Cir. 1979) Facts: In the midst of a professional football game, plaintiff Dale Hackbart and defendant, Charles Clark, were on opposing teams. During one of the plays, Hackbart fell to one knee in front of Clark. In retaliation, Clark intentionally struck a blow to the back of Hackbart’s head with enough force to knock both of the players to the ground. However, a foul was not called during the game, nor was the incident reported by either of the players. Some time after the game, Hackbart decided to seek medical treatment, and it was discovered that he had sustained a serious neck fracture injury. Procedural History: The plaintiff sues defendant, Cincinnati Bengals, for damages caused by the actions of Charles Clark. Originally, the trial court determined in favor of the defendant. However, the judgment was reversed and remanded by the appellate court for a new trial. Issue: Is the plaintiff entitle...
Read more