Battery has shifted from unlawful contact to offensive or harmful contact!!

Eggshell rule only applies to intentional torts! Not negligence!

 Under negligence, its only “foreseeable”
 Why? Because intentional harms are more culpable!
o Trespass and heart attack case.
o Yes, you are liable to heart attack.
o Liable since direct causation.
o how might we argue transfer of intent?

Two types of causation

 Cause in law
o Proximate in time and in space. So, it is foreseeable that somehow the harm
incurred is related.
 But for your action no harm
 But for your action no contact
 Cause in fact

“Substantial certainty”  , the kid pulled the chair for his own use!
 court not happy with willful  more than one intent!
 court not happy with

General intent 
Specific intent 

Why does the court hold minors and adults with the same culpability in intentional torts? (bow
and arrow)
 In intentional torts, we assume you would have the same intent as an adult (Transfer of
intent from assault to battery! Pg 20, note: 3.)
 No vicarious liability from children to parents! Parents are as a matter of common law
not held liable for negligent or intentional behavior of their kids unless statute law states
otherwise. E.g. note 5, pg. 20!
o However, parents can still be negligent! E.g. why give a 7 year old a bow and
arrow?
 Insurance doesn’t cover intentional torts!
 Intent has to be voluntary!

Types of intent!
 Specific
 General
 Recklessness
 Negligence

Which notes for the wolves?