Question

Officers Jones and Henderson are well-respected police officers in the Woodlawn community. They have been recognized, both within the police department and by the community, for their outstanding service. While on patrol in downtown Woodlawn late one evening, Jones and Henderson observe an individual sleeping on a park bench in the town square. The individual is Fred Ames, a homeless person known in the community for his trouble with alcohol and illicit substances. Ames has a twenty-year history of bad choices and bad luck, and most in Woodlawn “know his story.” Woodlawn does not have a law against vagrancy or homelessness. Determined to “clean up” the downtown area, the officers demand that Ames seat himself in the back of the squad car. Reluctantly, and without the use of force on the part of Jones and Henderson, Ames complies. Officers Jones and Henderson transport Ames to a rural area, where they release him on a dark country road (hoping to scare him), and warn him not to return to Woodlawn until he “cleans up his act once and for all.” Have Officers Jones and Henderson committed an intentional tort (or more than one tort) against Ames? If so, what tort(s)? If one or more intentional torts have been committed, what type of damages might Ames recover?

Answer 1

As per Kubasek, a tort is a common wrong or damage to another, other than rupture of agreement, giving the harmed party the privilege to bring a claim against the miscreant to recuperate pay for financial as well as physical harms. Torts can be characterized into three classes;

Intentional

Negligent

Strict risk

Intentional torts happen when one purposefully takes part in act that makes damage another. Deliberate torts essentially incorporate battery, ambush, false detainment, misrepresentation, criticism, intrusion of security, trespass, and transformation. One specific deliberate tort which is hard to demonstrate in a courtroom is purposeful Infliction of Emotional Distress. For this situation the offended party needs to really demonstrate that another person occupied with disreputable direct, with the plan of frightening someone else, and causing serious passionate pain or substantial mischief.

As clarified the officers likely dedicated no less than two deliberate torts against Ames. Q: If all in all, what tort(s)? A: The officers likely dedicated at any rate the deliberate torts of false detainment and purposeful punishment of enthusiastic pain (the officers most likely likewise disregarded Ames' social equality under the U.S. Constitution, offering ascend to a claim by Ames against then under 42 U.S.C. Segment 1983, yet that subject is past the extent of the part). As indicated by the course reading, "false detainment happens when an individual is kept or controlled without wanting to for an obvious timeframe."