Case Brief Assignment 1PLST 201
docx
keyboard_arrow_up
School
Liberty University *
*We aren’t endorsed by this school
Course
201
Subject
Law
Date
Jan 9, 2024
Type
docx
Pages
2
Uploaded by SargentOpossum3223
Case Brief Assignment 1
PLST 201
Citation: Garratt v. Dailey, 279 P. 2d 1091 (Wash. 1955)
Parties: Ruth Garratt Plaintiff-Appellant; Brian Dailey Defendant-Appellee
Facts: Brian Dailey and his mother was visiting with his aunt Ruth Garratt in her back yard. When Ruth
Garratt came from inside her house to the back yard and sometime after her entrance, Brian Dailey picked up an moved a lightly built wood lawn chair that was in the back yard a few feet sideways and seated himself therein. Brian then noticed that Ruth Garrett was about to sit where the lawn chair was previously located and he quickly got up from the chair and attempted to move the chair towards Ruth Garratt to assist her with sitting in the chair. However, due to Brian’s small size, he was unable to get the chair under Ms. Garratt in time to prevent her from falling and sustaining a fracture to her hip and other injuries and damages.
Prior Proceedings: Ruth Garratt sought to recover damages from Brian Dailey. The trial court entered judgement for the defendant Brian Dailey on the basis that Brain an infant (age five) had no willful or unlawful purpose in moving the chair and that he had no intent to injure Ruth Garratt, nor did he have any intent to perform a prank or to effect and assault and batter to Ms. Garratt.
Issue: Did Brian have willful intent and knowledge to know that Ms. Garratt would be harmed by moving the chair?
Holdings: No. For an act to be done with intention of brining harmful contact, Brian would have had to cause serious injuries purposefully and knowingly to Ms. Garratt. Reasoning: Generally, but with certain notable exceptions, when a minor has committed a tort with force, he is liable to be proceeded against as any other person would be. However, it is not enough that the act itself is intentionally done, even though the actor realizes or should realize it contains a very grave risk of brining about the contact or apprehension. Such realization may make the actor’s conduct negligent or even reckless, but unless he realizes that to a substantial certainty, the contact will result in an adverse outcome, the actor has not the intention which is
necessary to make him liable under the rule stated. Without such knowledge or substantial certainty that Ms. Garratt would be harmed, Brian’s act in moving the chair, and there being no wrongful act, there would be no liability.
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