order 4990229
docx
keyboard_arrow_up
School
Jomo Kenyatta University of Agriculture and Technology, Nairobi *
*We aren’t endorsed by this school
Course
222
Subject
Law
Date
Nov 24, 2024
Type
docx
Pages
4
Uploaded by SargentJaguarPerson586
1
Torts Graded Q1
Student's Name
Institutional Affiliation
Course Name and Number
Instructors Name Date
2
Torts Graded Q1
Burt v. Sam
The intentional tort of trespass compounded Sam and Burt to land and trespass to chattel, which in this case is personal property. Sam invades Burt's personal property, the car, terra cotta pot, and "Glorious" rose bush without Burt's permission, making it a criminal offense (Wandt, 2021). Moreover, Sam is hiding a terra cotta pot somewhere Burt could not get, although Burt's property is also a commission of trespass to property. Sam also committed the intentional tort of conversion by taking the "Glorious" rose bush and taking it with him (Geistfeld, 2017). Sam also
committed conversion when returning the "Glorious" rose bush belonging to Burt; he destroyed it, depriving Burt of actual ownership of the property and its value per the competition they were bound to take. Sam also committed intentional infliction of emotional distress by hiding and carrying with him Burt's property. Additionally, Sam committed battery on the competitor when he punched him in the face leaving him unconscious, carrying Burt to his car, and locking him in
the trunk (Sugarman, 2017). Sam also committed false imprisonment by locking Burt in the car's trunk; although Burt was unconscious, he was confined without legal authority. Conversely, Burt
committed the tort of trespass by going into Sam's property land without Sam's permission.
Roberta v. Burt
Burt caused intentional infliction of emotional distress to Roberta by using her information of nervous condition to intimidate and torment her. Burt was involved in outrageous and extreme conduct with the intent of disturbing her, leading to emotional distress, and making her vomit and faint, which may have caused her bodily harm (Amendola, 2018). Sam also
3
emotionally assaulted Robert by threatening to have Sam arrested, although Roberta pleas to talk
to Sam about returning the property. By Burt knowing Roberta's condition and using that to cause her to harm intentionally, he committed an invasion of property which is appropriation, referring to the unauthorized use of Robert's likeness for profit which, in this case, was Burt’s punishing Sam indirectly (Geistfeld, 2017). This was misuse of information for personal gain.
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help
4
References
Amendola, M. S. (2018). Intentional infliction of emotional distress: A workplace perspective.
Vt. L. Rev.
,
43
, 93. https://heinonline.org/hol-cgi-bin/get_pdf.cgi?
handle=hein.journals/vlr43§ion=6
Geistfeld, M. A. (2017). Conceptualizing the Intentional Torts.
Journal of Tort Law
,
10
(2), 159-
196. https://doi.org/10.1515/jtl-2017-0024
Sugarman, S. D. (2017). Restating the Tort of Battery.
Journal of Tort Law
,
10
(2), 197-236.
https://doi.org/10.1515/jtl-2017-0020
Wandt, A. S. (2021). Tort: Property. In
Encyclopedia of Security and Emergency Management
(pp. 938-946). Cham: Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-70488-3_253