Hall v. McBryde
919 P.2d 910 (Colo. Ct. App. 1996)
Tort Law
PROCEDURAL HISTORY: Plaintiff victim brought a cause of action against defendant alleged tortfeasor to recover damages for battery. The victim also brought a claim against defendants, alleged tortfeasor's parents, for negligent maintenance of a weapon and negligent supervision. The District Court (Colorado) entered a judgment in favor of the alleged tortfeasor and his parents. The victim sought review of the judgment.
FACTS:
-The tortfeasor was at his home when a group of youths approached the home in a vehicle.
-The youths began shooting at the tortfeasor's home.
- The tortfeasor retrieved his parent's gun from beneath their mattress and fired four shots towards the car.
-During the exchange of gunfire, one of the bullets struck the victim in the abdomen.
-The victim lived next door to the tortfeasor.
RULES
-With respect to the level of intent necessary for a battery and the transferability of such intent, the following are factors to be considered: (1) If an act is done with the intention of inflicting upon another an offensive but not a harmful bodily contact, or of putting another in apprehension of either a harmful or offensive bodily contact, and such act causes a bodily contact to the other, the actor is liable to the other for a battery although the act was not done with the intention of bringing about the resulting bodily harm. (2) If an act is done with the intention of affecting a third person in the manner stated in Subsection (1), but causes a harmful bodily contact to another, the actor is liable to such other as fully as though he intended so to affect him.
ANALYSIS
-The court found that the trial court properly entered judgment in favor of the tortfeasor's parents on the victim's claims for negligent maintenance of a weapon and negligent supervision.
-The tortfeasor's mother had no knowledge of the gun's existence and the tortfeasor's father acted with reasonable care to conceal the weapon's existence from his son.
-The court reversed the trial court's judgment in favor of the tortfeasor on the battery claim.
-The evidence established that the tortfeasor intended to put the youths in the vehicle in apprehension of harmful bodily contact.
-The tortfeasor's intent toward the youths in the car was transferred to the victim.
CONCLUSION: The judgment of the trial court was affirmed in part and reversed in part.
---
Interested in learning how to get the top grades in your law school classes? Want to learn how to study smarter than your competition? Interested in transferring to a high ranked school?
919 P.2d 910 (Colo. Ct. App. 1996)
Tort Law
PROCEDURAL HISTORY: Plaintiff victim brought a cause of action against defendant alleged tortfeasor to recover damages for battery. The victim also brought a claim against defendants, alleged tortfeasor's parents, for negligent maintenance of a weapon and negligent supervision. The District Court (Colorado) entered a judgment in favor of the alleged tortfeasor and his parents. The victim sought review of the judgment.
FACTS:
-The tortfeasor was at his home when a group of youths approached the home in a vehicle.
-The youths began shooting at the tortfeasor's home.
- The tortfeasor retrieved his parent's gun from beneath their mattress and fired four shots towards the car.
-During the exchange of gunfire, one of the bullets struck the victim in the abdomen.
-The victim lived next door to the tortfeasor.
RULES
-With respect to the level of intent necessary for a battery and the transferability of such intent, the following are factors to be considered: (1) If an act is done with the intention of inflicting upon another an offensive but not a harmful bodily contact, or of putting another in apprehension of either a harmful or offensive bodily contact, and such act causes a bodily contact to the other, the actor is liable to the other for a battery although the act was not done with the intention of bringing about the resulting bodily harm. (2) If an act is done with the intention of affecting a third person in the manner stated in Subsection (1), but causes a harmful bodily contact to another, the actor is liable to such other as fully as though he intended so to affect him.
ANALYSIS
-The court found that the trial court properly entered judgment in favor of the tortfeasor's parents on the victim's claims for negligent maintenance of a weapon and negligent supervision.
-The tortfeasor's mother had no knowledge of the gun's existence and the tortfeasor's father acted with reasonable care to conceal the weapon's existence from his son.
-The court reversed the trial court's judgment in favor of the tortfeasor on the battery claim.
-The evidence established that the tortfeasor intended to put the youths in the vehicle in apprehension of harmful bodily contact.
-The tortfeasor's intent toward the youths in the car was transferred to the victim.
CONCLUSION: The judgment of the trial court was affirmed in part and reversed in part.
---
Interested in learning how to get the top grades in your law school classes? Want to learn how to study smarter than your competition? Interested in transferring to a high ranked school?
No comments:
Post a Comment