Fall 2025 Torts Final Exam Questions
and Answers
Elements of Intentional Torts - --Answer --Volitional act, intent, a resulting
consequence (causation)
Elements of Battery - --Answer --[1] Intent, [2] contact that is harmful or
offensive, [3] with a person of another
Intent for Battery - --Answer --Desire to make contact and knowledge to a
substantial certainty that such contact would be harmful or offensive (objective
standard)
Single Intent Jurisdiction for Battery - --Answer --If a person intends to
make contact with a person of another that ends up being harmful or offensive,
that person is liable for battery, regardless of their intention to cause harm or
offend.
Wagner v. Utah (2005) - --Answer --A woman was attacked by a mentally
handicapped man in the custody of the state.
....COPYRIGHT ©️ 2025 ALL RIGHTS RESERVED...TRUSTED & VERIFIED 1
,Illustrates Single Intent Jurisdiction
Dual Intent Jurisdiction for Battery - --Answer --If a person not only
intended to contact another person, but ALSO intended for that contact to be
harmful or offensive to the other person or has knowledge to a substantial
certainty that such conduct would be harmful or offensive, then they have
committed a battery.
White v. Muniz (2000) - --Answer --Worker attacked by elderly patient at
care center.
Illustrates Dual Intent Jurisdiction
Elements of Assault - --Answer --[1] intent [2] to cause a reasonable
apprehension [3] of harmful or offensive contact
Intent for Assault - --Answer --Desire to do something and knowledge to a
substantial certainty that that action would cause a reasonable apprehension of
offensive contact
To Cause Reasonable Apprehension for Assault - --Answer --A reasonable
person would perceive that contact was imminent
....COPYRIGHT ©️ 2025 ALL RIGHTS RESERVED...TRUSTED & VERIFIED 2
, Harmful or Offensive Conduct for Assault - --Answer --contact MUST be
imminent and not conditional
Transferred intent - --Answer --recognized between assault and battery and
person to person
Elements of Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress - --Answer --[1]
extreme and outrageous conduct that [2] intentionally or recklessly [3] causes [4]
severe emotional distress
Extreme and outrageous conduct - --Answer --The recitation of the facts to
an average member of the community would arouse his resentment against the
actor and lead him or her to exclaim, "Outrageous!"
Shumate v. Twin Tower Hospitality, LLC (2009) - --Answer --An instance
of overt racial discrimination can meet the standard of "extreme and outrageous"
conduct under Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress.
What is often NOT considered extreme and outrageous conduct? - --
Answer --hurt feeling, rough language, inconsiderate and unkind behavior,
unflattering opinions, mere insults, indignities, threats, annoyances, petty
oppressions
Severe and emotional distress standard - --Answer --the emotional distress
must be "so severe that no reasonable person would endure it" - In some
....COPYRIGHT ©️ 2025 ALL RIGHTS RESERVED...TRUSTED & VERIFIED 3
and Answers
Elements of Intentional Torts - --Answer --Volitional act, intent, a resulting
consequence (causation)
Elements of Battery - --Answer --[1] Intent, [2] contact that is harmful or
offensive, [3] with a person of another
Intent for Battery - --Answer --Desire to make contact and knowledge to a
substantial certainty that such contact would be harmful or offensive (objective
standard)
Single Intent Jurisdiction for Battery - --Answer --If a person intends to
make contact with a person of another that ends up being harmful or offensive,
that person is liable for battery, regardless of their intention to cause harm or
offend.
Wagner v. Utah (2005) - --Answer --A woman was attacked by a mentally
handicapped man in the custody of the state.
....COPYRIGHT ©️ 2025 ALL RIGHTS RESERVED...TRUSTED & VERIFIED 1
,Illustrates Single Intent Jurisdiction
Dual Intent Jurisdiction for Battery - --Answer --If a person not only
intended to contact another person, but ALSO intended for that contact to be
harmful or offensive to the other person or has knowledge to a substantial
certainty that such conduct would be harmful or offensive, then they have
committed a battery.
White v. Muniz (2000) - --Answer --Worker attacked by elderly patient at
care center.
Illustrates Dual Intent Jurisdiction
Elements of Assault - --Answer --[1] intent [2] to cause a reasonable
apprehension [3] of harmful or offensive contact
Intent for Assault - --Answer --Desire to do something and knowledge to a
substantial certainty that that action would cause a reasonable apprehension of
offensive contact
To Cause Reasonable Apprehension for Assault - --Answer --A reasonable
person would perceive that contact was imminent
....COPYRIGHT ©️ 2025 ALL RIGHTS RESERVED...TRUSTED & VERIFIED 2
, Harmful or Offensive Conduct for Assault - --Answer --contact MUST be
imminent and not conditional
Transferred intent - --Answer --recognized between assault and battery and
person to person
Elements of Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress - --Answer --[1]
extreme and outrageous conduct that [2] intentionally or recklessly [3] causes [4]
severe emotional distress
Extreme and outrageous conduct - --Answer --The recitation of the facts to
an average member of the community would arouse his resentment against the
actor and lead him or her to exclaim, "Outrageous!"
Shumate v. Twin Tower Hospitality, LLC (2009) - --Answer --An instance
of overt racial discrimination can meet the standard of "extreme and outrageous"
conduct under Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress.
What is often NOT considered extreme and outrageous conduct? - --
Answer --hurt feeling, rough language, inconsiderate and unkind behavior,
unflattering opinions, mere insults, indignities, threats, annoyances, petty
oppressions
Severe and emotional distress standard - --Answer --the emotional distress
must be "so severe that no reasonable person would endure it" - In some
....COPYRIGHT ©️ 2025 ALL RIGHTS RESERVED...TRUSTED & VERIFIED 3
