Intentional Torts - Bar Exam Uniform

1. In an action by the collector against the mechanic, what is the collector's strongest claim? Select one.
   Answer: Conversion, because the mechanic's actions constituted a serious exercise of dominion and control over the car. The correct answer is C. Conversion is an intentional exercise of dominion or control over a chattel which so seriously interferes with the right of another to control it that the actor may justly be required to pay the other the full value of the chattel. The long joyride, combined with the substantial damage that occurred during this unauthorized use, is a serious enough interference to constitute conversion. The remedy for conversion is the fair market value of the chattel at the time of conversion (a forced sale). B is incorrect because while this is a trespass to chattels, conversion is the stronger claim due to the seriousness of the interference and extent of the damage, which allows for a greater recovery. A and D are also plausible claims, but conversion is the strongest intentional tort claim that directly addresses the wrongful exercise of dominion leading to the loss in value.
2. If the junior executive sues the CEO for false imprisonment, what is the most likely outcome? Select one.
   Answer: The CEO will not be liable, because a reasonable and known means of escape was available to the executive. The correct answer is B. False imprisonment requires that the plaintiff be confined to a bounded area without a reasonable means of escape. The junior executive was aware of an unlocked fire escape, which constitutes a reasonable means of escape. The fact that he chose not to use it for fear of embarrassment does not negate its existence as a reasonable escape route. Therefore, the element of confinement to a bounded area is not met. A is incorrect because confinement is not established if a reasonable escape is known. C is incorrect because it describes elements of IIED, not false imprisonment. D is incorrect because physical harm is not a required element of false imprisonment.
3. If the at-fault party sues the driver for assault, which of the driver's actions is the most critical for establishing the claim? Select one.
   Answer: Raising the tire iron in a threatening manner. The correct answer is B. Assault requires an act by the defendant that creates a reasonable apprehension in the plaintiff of imminent harmful or offensive contact. While all the listed actions contribute to the threatening atmosphere, the overt act of raising the tire iron is the most critical physical gesture that creates the apprehension of an imminent battery. Mere words (A and C) are generally not sufficient to constitute an assault unless accompanied by a physical act. Standing close (D) adds to the threat but is less definitive than the act of brandishing a weapon. The combination of the act and the words creates the assault, but the act of raising the weapon is the most essential element.
4. What is the strongest intentional tort claim the friend could bring against the student regarding the sculpture? Select one.
   Answer: Trespass to chattels, because the student intentionally intermeddled with the friend's property. The correct answer is B. Trespass to chattels is the intentional intermeddling with the chattel of another that causes harm or dispossession. Even a brief dispossession, like taking the sculpture to another room for five minutes, constitutes a trespass to chattels. A is incorrect because conversion requires a more serious interference with property rights, such as destruction, alteration, or a long-term deprivation of use, which would justify a forced sale of the item. This brief, harmless use does not rise to that level. C and D are incorrect because for a trespass to chattels based on dispossession, proof of actual damages is not required; the dispossession itself is the harm. Nominal damages could be awarded.
5. If the injured friend sues his friend for battery, what is the defendant's strongest defense? Select one.
   Answer: Consent, because the plaintiff agreed to play tackle football and the tackle was within the ordinary scope of the game. The correct answer is B. In the context of intentional torts, consent is the most appropriate defense. By agreeing to play tackle football, the plaintiff consented to the contacts that are a normal part of the game. A normal tackle, even one that results in injury, is within the scope of that consent. A is incorrect because assumption of risk is a defense to negligence, not intentional torts. While the concepts are related, consent is the proper term for a defense to battery. C is incorrect as self-defense is not applicable to a sports context. D is incorrect because the intent required for battery is the intent to make the contact, not the intent to cause the resulting harm. The defendant clearly intended to tackle the plaintiff.
6. In a suit for assault, will the teenager likely prevail against the homeowner? Select one.
   Answer: No, because the teenager was not aware of the threat until after the danger had passed. The correct answer is C. A key element of assault is that the plaintiff must have a reasonable apprehension of an imminent harmful or offensive contact. Apprehension requires that the plaintiff be aware of the defendant's threatening act. Because the teenager was unaware of the homeowner's actions until the threat was over, he could not have been in apprehension of the contact. A is incorrect because while the homeowner had the requisite intent, the plaintiff's apprehension is also a required element. B is incorrect because taking a substantial step toward a battery is an element of criminal attempt, not the tort of assault. D is incorrect because intent to cause apprehension is sufficient for assault; intent to make contact is not required.
7. If the robber sues the man for battery, is the man's self-defense claim likely to succeed? Select one.
   Answer: Yes, because the man reasonably believed he was facing a threat of serious bodily harm or death. The correct answer is C. Self-defense permits the use of force that is reasonably necessary to protect against an imminent threat. The use of deadly force is permissible if the person reasonably believes they are in danger of serious bodily injury or death. Given the surprise attack, the demand for a wallet, and the size difference, a reasonable person in the man's position could believe the robber was armed and posed a deadly threat. The reasonableness of this belief is judged from the perspective of the defendant at the time of the incident, not with the benefit of hindsight. A is incorrect because the key is the man's reasonable belief, not the actual fact of whether the robber was armed. B is incorrect as most jurisdictions do not require retreat before using deadly force when one is not the initial aggressor (the "stand your ground" principle). D is a plausible but incorrect legal theory; while engaging in a felony may limit a plaintiff's recovery in some contexts, it does not automatically negate a battery claim.
8. If the debtor sues the debt collection agency for intentional infliction of emotional distress (IIED), is the suit likely to succeed? Select one.
   Answer: Yes, because the agent's conduct was extreme and outrageous, and caused the debtor severe emotional distress. The correct answer is C. IIED requires (1) extreme and outrageous conduct by the defendant, (2) intent or recklessness, (3) causation, and (4) severe emotional distress. While simple insults are not enough, conduct can become outrageous due to an abuse of a position of power or by targeting a plaintiff's known sensitivities. Courts have often found the public, harassing conduct of debt collectors to be outrageous. The debtor's need for therapy indicates severe distress. A is incorrect because the context (public place, workplace, in front of supervisor) elevates the conduct beyond mere insults. B is incorrect as most jurisdictions no longer require physical symptoms for an IIED claim. D is incorrect as a statutory violation does not automatically establish a common law tort, although it can be evidence of outrageousness.
9. Which intentional tort theory provides the resident with the best basis for recovery against the factory for the costs of cleaning? Select one.
   Answer: Trespass to land, because the factory intentionally caused a physical invasion of the resident's property by the particulate matter. The correct answer is B. Trespass to land occurs when there is an intentional invasion of another's interest in the exclusive possession of land. Modern courts recognize that invisible particles can constitute a physical invasion sufficient for trespass when the defendant intends the conduct that causes the invasion. Here, the factory knew its emissions would settle on neighboring property, satisfying the intent requirement. The physical deposit of particles on the resident's property constitutes the invasion. While nuisance (A) is also a potential claim, trespass is often preferred because it doesn't require proving that the interference was substantial and unreasonable. C is incorrect because conversion applies to chattels and requires a more serious interference with possession. D states a possible negligence claim but the question asks for an intentional tort theory.
10. Can the bystander successfully sue the assailant for battery? Select one.
    Answer: Yes, under the doctrine of transferred intent. The correct answer is C. The doctrine of transferred intent applies when a defendant intends to commit an intentional tort against one person but instead commits it against another. The intent is said to "transfer" from the intended victim to the actual victim. Here, the assailant intended to commit a battery (or at least an assault) against his rival. This intent transfers to the bystander who was actually struck. Therefore, the bystander can establish the intent element for battery. A is incorrect because transferred intent specifically addresses this situation. B is incorrect because the rival's act of ducking is a foreseeable reaction and not a superseding cause. D is incorrect because the action can be framed as an intentional tort due to transferred intent, which is a stronger claim than negligence.
11. If the server brings a battery claim against the chef, is the server likely to prevail? Select one.
    Answer: Yes, because the chef knew with substantial certainty that the server would come into contact with the salt. The correct answer is A. The tort of battery requires an intentional act that causes a harmful or offensive contact. The intent element is satisfied if the defendant acts with the purpose of causing the contact or knows with substantial certainty that the contact will result. Here, the chef intended for the server to come into contact with the salt by swapping the contents of the sugar bowl. This contact was harmful. B is incorrect because the defendant's motive is irrelevant; the intent required is the intent to cause the contact, not the intent to cause the resulting harm. C is incorrect because the server did not consent to the harmful contact with the salt; he consented only to drinking coffee with sugar. D is incorrect because it states the standard for intentional infliction of emotional distress, not battery.
12. Based on these facts, which of the following intentional torts could you most successfully argue was committed against your client? Select one.
    Answer: Battery, because the guard intentionally made offensive physical contact with your client without consent. The correct answer is B. Battery is the most clearly established tort on these facts. It requires an intentional, offensive touching of another without consent. The guard's act of grabbing the client's arm satisfies all these elements. The contact was intentional and is considered offensive to a reasonable person. A is incorrect because the client, being hard of hearing, was not aware of the guard's shout and therefore did not have the required apprehension for an assault claim. C is a weak claim because while the situation was upsetting, a court may not find the guard's mistaken actions rose to the level of "extreme and outrageous" conduct required for IIED. D is a plausible claim, but the shopkeeper's privilege might apply if the guard's suspicion was reasonable at the time, even if mistaken. The battery claim, based on the physical contact, is the most direct and least defense-prone claim.
13. If the man sues the theater for conversion, is he likely to succeed? Select one.
    Answer: Yes, because the theater's refusal to return his coat constituted a serious interference with his property rights. The correct answer is A. Conversion is the intentional exercise of dominion or control over another's chattel that seriously interferes with the owner's rights. When the attendant refused to return the correct coat upon a proper demand, the theater (through its agent) wrongfully exercised dominion over the man's property. This wrongful refusal to return a chattel (a misdelivery) is a serious interference that constitutes conversion. B is incorrect because the return of the property does not undo the tort; it only mitigates damages. C is incorrect because the intent required for conversion is the intent to perform the act that interferes with the owner's rights (i.e., the intent to refuse to return the coat), not an intent to do wrong. D describes a remedy for the lesser tort of trespass to chattels; for conversion, the man is entitled to the full market value of the coat at the time of conversion, although he would have to give up the coat if he accepted that remedy. Given he recovered it, damages would be adjusted, but the tort was still committed.
14. If the patient sues the surgeon for battery, is the patient likely to win? Select one.
    Answer: Yes, because the surgeon exceeded the scope of the patient's consent. The correct answer is A. A battery is a harmful or offensive contact without consent. Consent is a defense, but it is limited to the scope of the consent given. The patient consented to surgery on his right knee, not his left. By operating on the left knee, the surgeon exceeded the scope of that consent, and the contact was therefore unprivileged. This constitutes a battery. B is incorrect because the surgeon's good faith and the lack of physical harm are not defenses when the contact itself was not consented to. C is incorrect because the procedure on the other knee is not incidental; it is a separate medical decision requiring separate consent. D is incorrect because the issue is not medical malpractice (negligence), but battery (an intentional tort), for which the standard is lack of consent, not unreasonableness.
15. Is the hiker liable to the landowner for trespass to land? Select one.
    Answer: Yes, because she intentionally entered the land, even if she did not know it was private property. The correct answer is A. Trespass to land requires an intentional physical invasion of the plaintiff's real property. The intent required is the intent to enter the land, not the intent to trespass. The hiker intended to walk and camp where she did, satisfying the intent element. Her mistake as to the ownership of the land is not a defense. B is incorrect because a good-faith mistake is not a defense to intentional trespass. C is incorrect because actual damages are not required for a trespass to land claim; the plaintiff can recover at least nominal damages for the invasion of their possessory rights. D is incorrect because while signage can defeat a defense of implied consent, its absence does not negate a trespass claim.
16. In the lawsuit, which defense provides the man with the best chance of success? Select one.
    Answer: Recapture of chattels, because he used reasonable, non-deadly force in hot pursuit to recover stolen property. The correct answer is D. The defense of recapture of chattels allows a person to use reasonable, non-deadly force to recover property, provided they are in "hot pursuit" of the person who wrongfully took it. Here, the man was in immediate pursuit of the thief and used a reasonable amount of force (a tackle) to recover the laptop. A is incorrect because defense of others applies to protecting a person from bodily harm, not protecting their property. B is incorrect because the man was not defending himself from a threat. C is incorrect because necessity typically applies to actions taken to prevent a greater harm, often from natural forces, and is not the most specific defense for recovering stolen goods from a thief.
17. The farmer sues the fire department for the value of the destroyed orchard. What is the fire department's best defense? Select one.
    Answer: Public necessity, because the action was taken to protect the public from a widespread disaster. The correct answer is C. The defense of public necessity applies when a defendant interferes with a plaintiff's property in an emergency to protect the community or a substantial group of people. Here, the fire department destroyed the farmer's property to save the town from a wildfire. This is a classic example of public necessity. Unlike private necessity, public necessity is a complete defense, meaning the defendant does not have to compensate the plaintiff for the damage. A is incorrect because the action was to protect the public, not just the defendant's own interests. B is incorrect as consent is not implied in this situation. D is incorrect because sovereign immunity has been widely waived for tortious acts of government employees, and even if it applied, public necessity is the direct substantive defense to the trespass/conversion claim.
18. If the woman later sues the customer for conversion, what is the likely outcome? Select one.
    Answer: The customer will be liable, because he intentionally exercised dominion and control over the phone inconsistent with the woman's rights. The correct answer is A. Conversion is the intentional exercise of dominion or control over a chattel that so seriously interferes with the owner's rights that it justifies a forced sale. Taking another's property with the intent to steal it is a serious interference, and the conversion is complete at the moment of the wrongful taking. The fact that the chattel was returned shortly after does not undo the tort, although it may mitigate the damages. B and D are incorrect because the intent to permanently deprive the owner of the property makes the interference serious enough to be conversion, not merely trespass to chattels, regardless of the short duration. C is incorrect because the legal classification of the property as mislaid might be relevant in a criminal context or a finder's rights case, but it does not change the tortious nature of the customer's intentional act of taking it for himself.

Start this quiz