1.D and P worked on the same shift at E Company. D found P quite attractive and several times asked her to wear more revealing clothes and to engage in sexual relations with him. P refused each time and told D to stop bothering her. On two subsequent occasions, D came up to P while she was working and gently massaged her shoulders. P pulled away both times and complained to her supervisor. P suffered no physical harm. On these facts, could a jury find D liable for battery?

A.No, because P suffered no physical injury.

B.Yes, because P had told D to leave her alone.

C.No, if the jury finds that D had no purpose either to harm or offend P.

D.Yes, provided that the jury finds that the reasonable person would have found D’s actions offensive.

2.P was riding his bicycle in New York’s Central Park when a passing runner inadvertently made contact with P, causing P to crash. P suffered a compound fracture of the humerus. (A compound fracture is one where the bone protrudes through the skin.) D, a physician, also running in the park, stopped to render aid to P and began to attempt to reduce the fracture. P screamed in pain and told the physician to stop. D continued until the protruding bone was realigned. On these facts, could a jury find D liable for battery?

A.No, provided that D persuades the jury that without the treatment D administered, P would likely have suffered far greater injury and would have been at risk of dying because of untreatable infection from the dirty wound.

B.Yes, because D was not P’s physician.

C.No, because the physician was responding to an emergency situation.

D.Yes, but only for the treatment that P received after his request that D desist.

3.P, a six-year old, was crossing a busy street without paying proper attention. D, a passer-by, saw a car approaching P at a speed that would have caused the car to collide with P before P could have reacted to a shouted caution. D ran across the street, scooping P up and saving P from a life-threatening situation. P was autistic and could not tolerate being touched. The unexpected contact caused P to become severely upset, and when D set P down on the sidewalk, P began to hit his head on the sidewalk, causing himself injury. On these facts, is D liable for battery?

A.No, because P’s injuries were self- inflicted.

B.Yes, because D touched P without P’s consent, and the touching caused P injury.

C.No, because D lacked the intent required for battery.

D.Yes, because D had no legal responsibility to aid P.

1.D and P were having an angry argument. During the altercation, D stepped into his office and came out with a gun, which he pointed at P, then 50 feet distant, in a threatening manner. P dove for the ground, at which point D returned to his office. The gun was not loaded. On these facts, could a jury find D liable for assault?

A.No, because P suffered no physical injury.

B.Yes, because the angry argument had frightened P, who was concerned that D might initiate fisticuffs.

C.No, if the jury finds that D had no purpose to frighten P.

D.Yes, provided that the jury finds that P had no way of knowing whether the gun was loaded or not.

2.P was driving his car. D had been tailgating P, but pulled up next to P at a traffic light, rolled down his window, and began shaking his fist and cursing at P. P’s doors were locked, but he could hear D and see D’s contorted face. When the light turned green, D pulled away more quickly than P and, while the rear of D’s car was even with the front of P’s, briefly swung the steering wheel to the right. The cars did not touch, but P, alarmed, steered his car sharply to the right, running off the street onto an adjacent lawn. On these facts, could a jury find D liable for assault?

A.No, if the jury finds that D had no intention to enter P’s lane of traffic.

B.Yes, because P’s car ran off the road.

C.No, because the vehicles never came into contact.

D.Yes, because D’s actions were substantially certain to cause P to fear an imminent collision.

3.D was on his way to the corner store when he encountered P on the sidewalk. D and P hated each other, and they got into a heated argument. D said to P, “If you’re still here after I come back, I’m going to beat you to a pulp. On these facts, is there an assault?

A.No, unless D made some gesture indicating his firmness of purpose.

B.Yes, because D threatened imminent, unconsented-to physical contact.

C.No, because D’s statement was conditional and related to a future event.

D.Yes, provided D’s conduct frightened P and caused him to flee.

1.P was traveling from Westchester County Airport to San Francisco. Because there are no direct flights from Westchester to anywhere at all, P’s itinerary called for him to change planes at Chicago’s O’Hare airport. P was an obstinate passenger and continuously challenged the flight attendants’ authority and resisted obeying directions. When the flight arrived in Chicago, airline officials told P that they would not permit him to board his connecting flight to San Francisco or, indeed, to board any flight. P, having only his airline ticket and $10.00, was unable to get transportation for five hours until his cousin from St. Louis drove to pick him up. On these facts, is there false imprisonment by the airline?

A. Yes, because P was unable to leave the airport for five hours.

B. No, because P was not restrained in a bounded area.

C.Yes, because the airline breached its contract of carriage with plaintiff.

D.No, because it was P’s own fault that the airline would not transport him further.

2.D, emerging from a local grocery store, saw P, a teenager, placing leaflets on car windshields, including D’s. D accosted P, grabbing him by the arm, and demanded that P return to D’s car and remove the leaflet. P struggled, but was unable to break D’s grip. D berated P for about a minute and then released him. On these facts, is there false imprisonment?

A.No, because an outdoor parking lot is not a bounded area.

B.Yes, because D committed a battery.

C.No, because there was no substantial confinement.

D.Yes, because P was unable to break D’s grip.

3.P’s 15-day sentence for shoplifting was up. State law requires jailers to release prisoners at noon on the last day of confinement. On this day, the jailer was interrogating a suspect in a murder case and did not open P’s cell door until 1 p.m. On these facts, is there false imprisonment?

A.Yes, because the jailer had an obligation to release P at the appointed time.

B.No, provided that the jailer was not the official who originally confined P.

C.Yes, provided that P suffered physical injury or economic loss because of the delay.

D.No, because P was confined pursuant to judicial order.