Tort Law Intent, Negligence, and Liability Cases Exam questions and answers Graded A+

Tort Law Intent, Negligence, and Liability Cases Exam questions and answers Graded A+ Garratt v. Dailey -F: D, 5 years old, moved chair as P was sitting down. Two versions of facts — D's version: moved the chair, realized P was going to sit, tried to move it back. R: A minor may be held liable for battery if he acted intentionally, with knowledge to a substantial certainty that his actions would cause harmful or offensive contact. Intent = purpose OR knowledge. H: Court determined D may not have had PURPOSE but may have had KNOWLEDGE. Remanded for determination. Polmatier v. Russ -F: Mentally ill son-in-law beat and killed father-in-law. D claimed intent was caused by mental illness — believed victim was a spy and went to get more ammo for that purpose. R: General rule: treat the insane or mentally ill like any other defendant. If they have the requisite intent, they are liable. The reason why they have that intent is irrelevant. Have to compensate the plaintiff. H: D liable despite mental illness. Cohen v. Smith -F: P was havin