Battery

Rule

Battery is the intentional infliction of a harmful or offensive contact with another person. It is an intentional tort protecting against direct invasions of bodily integrity.

Elements

  1. Act by the defendant.
  2. Intent — defendant had purpose to cause a contact, or knowledge to a substantial certainty that contact would result (Garratt v. Dailey). Intent need not be to cause harm — only intent to make contact.
  3. Harmful or offensive contact — contact that causes bodily harm, or that a person of reasonable/ordinary sensitivity would find offensive (judged by normal social standards in context, not the subjective sensitivity of the plaintiff).
  4. Causation — the act caused the contact.
  5. Damages — nominal damages are sufficient; actual harm not required.

Key Points

  • Contact with an object the plaintiff is holding or closely connected to (e.g., a camera) counts as contact with the person (Picard v. Barry Pontiac-Buick).
  • “Offensive” contact is judged by normal social standards, context-dependent (crowded subway vs. quiet street).
  • Transferred intent: intent to commit battery, assault, false imprisonment, trespass to land, or trespass to chattel can transfer across these five torts and across victims.
  • No requirement of malice or bad faith to support a claim; punitive damages may still be available without proving malice separately.

Defenses

  • Consent (express or implied — e.g., sports participation, medical treatment).
  • Self-defense (reasonable belief of imminent harm, proportionate force).
  • Defense of others (same elements, but actor may be liable if mistaken).
  • Necessity (private or public).

Policy

  • Protects dignitary interest in bodily integrity.
  • Deters unwanted physical contact.
  • Liberty argument: parties should be free to dispose of their personality interests as they please (consent negates battery).

Key Cases

Covered In