White v. Muniz case brief

White v. Muniz case brief summary
999 P.2d 814 (2000)

CASE SYNOPSIS

Petitioner, personal representative of the estate of alleged tortfeasor, challenged the decision of the Colorado Court of Appeals, which determined that a mentally incapacitated adult should be held liable for her intentional tort even if she was unable to appreciate the wrongfulness of her actions.

CASE FACTS
Alleged tortfeasor elderly woman who was placed in a personal care center began to exhibit erratic behavior, becoming agitated easily and acting aggressively toward others on occasion. On one occasion, she struck plaintiff care-giver in the jaw. Petitioner, as personal representative of the estate of the alleged tortfeasor, appealed the decision of the lower court determining that a mentally incapacitated adult should be held liable for her intentional tort even if she was unable to appreciate the wrongfulness of her actions.

DISCUSSION

• The court reversed concluding that in order to recover on a theory of intentional tort, the plaintiff was required to prove that the actor, despite her characteristics, desired to cause both contact and offensive or harmful consequences by her act, although not the harm that actually resulted. 
• The court held that the jury had determined that there was no such intent.

CONCLUSION

The judgment was reversed and remanded because the court held that the jury determined that alleged tortfeasor did not intend to cause offensive or harmful consequences by her act.

Suggested Study Aids For Tort Law