E-NewsletterClick here to sign up for our newsletter. Assault & BatteryTwo common types of personal injury torts are assault and battery. Battery is often confused with assault, and the two terms are often intermingled and perceived as one tort. In actuality, they are two separate torts and must be regarded as such. An assault is an act that creates a reasonable apprehension of an imminent battery. A battery is the intentional and unpermitted physical contact with another by either an individual or an agency set in motion by an individual. With respect to assaults, all that is required is that the plaintiff perceive a threat that is regarded as imminent. It is not necessary that the plaintiff actually be frightened or intimidated. The focus of the inquiry is whether the apprehension is reasonable. In that regard, for example, where a defendant approaches an individual and says, in a matter-of-fact manner, "If the Bulls don't win the finals this season, I might have to hurt someone," it is unlikely that the plaintiff could successfully bring a claim against the defendant for assault. In many cases it is held that mere words are not enough to constitute an assault, and that there must be some accompanying overt act. In certain situations, a normally inoffensive movement, such as holding up an arm or reaching into a pocket, when coupled with offensive words, may be enough of an overt act to establish the tort of assault. In the same vein, a threatening gesture when accompanied by words negating any intent to render harm may not be considered an assault if a reasonable person would not perceive an immediate danger of a battery. For instance, if you approach someone shaking your fists, but saying "one of these days, I am going to get even with you" as you smile brightly and laugh, your actions may not constitute an assault, if a reasonable person would conclude you were joking. In order to recover on an assault claim, the plaintiff must establish that the defendant was actually capable, at the time the threat was made, of carrying it out. Therefore, if the defendant, who was incarcerated, yells at the plaintiff from behind bars that he would like to punch him "right then and there," it is unlikely that an assault has occurred. However, where the plaintiff reasonably believes that the assault could occur, even though the defendant is not actually capable of carrying out the threat, an assault has occurred. For example, if the defendant points an unloaded gun at the plaintiff and says "I oughtta shoot you," an assault will likely have occurred, as long as the plaintiff was unaware that the gun was, in fact, not loaded. Therefore, in order to prove a case for assault, the plaintiff must establish that the threat of harm was imminent, that the defendant was actually capable of carrying out the threat or the plaintiff reasonably believed he was actually capable, and that a reasonable person in the plaintiff's position would have been apprehensive. A battery can occur where an individual, or an item in contact with that individual such as clothing or an object being held, is touched in an offensive manner. As opposed to assault, the plaintiff need not have been aware of the contact at the time it actually occurred in order for a battery to result. In general, two different types of contact may constitute a battery. The first type of contact includes any type of physical harm including a cut, scrape, bruise, burn or fracture, no matter how slight. Physical pain, without any scar or physical "reminder" can also constitute a battery. The second type of contact includes any type of connection or impact which does not result in physical harm, but which is done without consent. For example, poking another with an angry finger (even in the air in front of them without actually making contact), spitting upon another, throwing a bucket of water upon another, or kissing and hugging someone without permission can constitute a battery. Battery is an intentional tort, so the plaintiff must prove that the defendant intended his conduct. If the defendant did not intend to impermissibly touch the plaintiff, then battery was not committed. (However, the defendant may be liable in negligence to the plaintiff in those situations.) The plaintiff need not prove that the defendant intended to actually harm the plaintiff, but only that the conduct itself was intentional and not an accident. A distinction is therefore drawn between the intent to harm and the intent to contact. For example, if you deliberately spit in another person's face, intending to make that contact but not intending any harm to result, you are still responsible for battery if harm does in fact result. A plaintiff will not be able to pursue a cause of action for battery if he consented to the contact For example, medical patients often consent to treatment by a physician. The acts of the physician in treating the patient would constitute battery in many circumstances if consent were not acquired. However, even where consent is obtained, if the actions of the defendant carry beyond the borders of the consent that was given, a battery may occur. In other situations, consent may be assumed given the relationship of the parties and the particular circumstances of the matter. Therefore, where two individuals are lifelong friends who are generally comfortable displaying their emotions to one another, a hug between the two is generally not considered a battery unless one makes clear that such touching is not consented to. Finally, the type of society that we live in often compels some type of touching, whether consented to or not, which is not considered a battery. For example, if you enter onto a crowded subway car, and bump into or brush up against another passenger, without any more significant contact, then a battery has not occurred. However, if you purposely bump into or brush up against the only other passenger, besides yourself, on a subway car, a battery is more likely to have occurred. Similarly, even on the crowded subway car, if a person bumps into or brushes up against, and then caresses or fondles another passenger, that person is more likely to be found to have committed battery, as well. The discussion above deals with civil tort actions for monetary damages. Assault and Battery can also be the basis of criminal prosecution by the State. While many aspects of criminal law focus on the rights of the criminal, recent attention has been focused on the rights of the victims of crimes, who often suffer great emotional, if not physical, injuries at the hands of the criminal. All fifty states and the federal government now have laws that protect victims. In many states, a victim is considered to be the person who directly suffers the effects of the crimes (such as the person who is murdered) and immediate family members who suffer the secondary effects of the crime (such as the loss of a loved one). If you have been a victim of a crime, you should know that there are ten major rights that you may have. Ten Rights of Crime Victims
Copyright © 1994-2006 FindLaw, a Thomson business DISCLAIMER: This site and any information contained herein are intended for informational purposes only and should not be construed as legal advice. Seek competent legal counsel for advice on any legal matter. |

