Wishnatsky v. Huey
Citation and Court
584 N.W.2d 859 (N.D. 1998), North Dakota Court of Appeals
Facts
Wishnatsky attempted to enter an office where Huey was having a private conversation with another attorney. Without looking, Huey pushed the door shut, causing it to strike Wishnatsky’s arm and push him back into the hallway. Wishnatsky sued for battery, claiming the contact was an offensive touching.
Issue
Whether Huey’s act of closing the door, which made incidental contact with Wishnatsky’s arm, constituted a battery.
Holding
The court held that Huey’s conduct did not constitute battery because the contact was trivial, not harmful, and not offensive to a person of ordinary sensibilities under the circumstances.
Rule / Doctrine
Battery requires an intentional act that causes a harmful or offensive contact. A contact is offensive only if it would offend a reasonable person’s sense of dignity — de minimis or trivial contacts that would not be offensive to an ordinary person do not satisfy this element, even if the plaintiff personally found them offensive.
Significance
Wishnatsky v. Huey illustrates the objective “reasonable person” standard for the offensiveness element of battery. It is used to introduce the requirement that the contact cross a threshold of social acceptability and to distinguish between technically unconsented contacts that are socially expected in daily life and contacts that rise to the level of battery.