III. Cohen v. Smith (Emphasis added.) Did the trial court err in improperly instructing the jury on intent? Synopsis of Rule of Law. In order to recover on a theory of intentional tort, the plaintiff was required to prove that the actor, despite her characteristics, desired to cause both contact and offensive or harmful consequences by her act, although not the harm that actually resulted. Knapp & Sachs, P.C., Benjamin Sachs, Debra Knapp, Denver, Colorado; Law Office of Kathleen Mullen, P.C., Kathleen Mullen, Denver, Colorado; The Legal Center For People With Disabilities And Older People, Chester R. Chapman, Claire Williamson, Denver, Colorado; Law Offices of John Robert Holland, P.C., John Robert Holland, Denver, Colorado, Attorneys for Amici Curiae AARP, The Alzheimer's Association (National), The Alzheimer's Association Rocky Mountain Chapter, The ARC of Colorado, Guardianship Alliance of Colorado, The Legal Center for People with Disabilities and Older People, and National Citizens' Coalition for Nursing Home Reform. Furthermore, because the mentally disabled are held to the reasonable person standard in negligence actions, victims may find relief more easily under a negligence cause of action.9 See Johnson v. Lambotte, 147 Colo. 203, 206, 363 P.2d 165, 166 (1961). He argued that the instruction improperly broadened the holding in Horton v. Reaves, 186 Colo. 149, 526 P.2d 304 (1974), where the supreme court held that an infant must appreciate the offensiveness or wrongfulness of her conduct to be liable for an intentional tort. Trespassers: As a general rule, the landowner owes no duty to a trespasser to make her land Subject of law: Chapter 9. Our decision today does not create a special rule for the elderly, but applies Colorado's intent requirement in the context of a woman suffering the effects of Alzheimer's. See id. This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply. An actor is subject to liability to another for battery if: Colorado law requires a dual intent, so the jury had to find Everly appreciated the, Vincent v Lake Erie Transportation Co Case Brief, Mohr v. Grantham Case Brief Torts Case brief, Biology 2 for Health Studies Majors (BIOL 1122), Strategic Decision Making and Management (BUS 5117), Nursing Care of the Childbearing Family (NURS 125), Health and Illness Across the Lifespan (NUR2214), Survey of Old and New Testament (BIBL 104), Pre service firefighter education and training (FSC-1106), Professional Career Development Seminar (NUR 4828), Professional Application in Service Learning I (LDR-461), Advanced Anatomy & Physiology for Health Professions (NUR 4904), Principles Of Environmental Science (ENV 100), Operating Systems 2 (proctored course) (CS 3307), Comparative Programming Languages (CS 4402), Business Core Capstone: An Integrated Application (D083), Chapter 1 - Principles of Animal Behavior, Chapter 5 - Summary Give Me Liberty! The term is used here to include both situations where P purchased the item directly from D and those where there was no contractual relationship between P and D. There is no fundamental constitutional right to engage in homosexual sodomy. Plaintiff filed a suit. . You have successfully signed up to receive the Casebriefs newsletter. Case Name: White v. Muniz Citation: 999 P.2d 814 (Colo. 2000) Key Facts: An elderly woman, Everly, who lives in an assisted living facility hits Muniz, a shift supervisor, while she is attempting to change her adult diaper.Everly was diagnosed with progressive dementia, loss of memory, impulse control and judgment, and Alzheimers. Appellate ct held instruction to be error and reversed. Victims may still bring intentional tort actions against mentally disabled adults, but to prevail, they must prove all the elements of the alleged tort. It read: The fact that a person may suffer from Dementia, Alzheimer type, does not prevent a finding that she acted intentionally. Issue. THE FEDERAL COMMERCE POWER. The Separation of Powers. DUE PROCESS OF LAW Three theories: There are three main theories under which a seller of a chattel ca Subject of law: Chapter 14. We conclude that an examination of this approach falls beyond the scope of the issue on certiorari. In selecting the instruction on intent, the trial court determined that Everly's condition rendered her mental state comparable to that of a child. Please check your email and confirm your registration. White v. Muniz Colorado Supreme Court 999 P.2d 814 (2000) Facts White (defendant) moved her elderly grandmother, Everly, into a nursing home. DUE PROCESS OF LAW. We find that the law of Colorado requires the jury to conclude that the defendant both intended the contact and intended it to be harmful or offensive. This chapter introduces adverse possession, a legal process to gain (or lose) title to either real or personal property. Synopsis of Rule of Law. Restatement (Second) of Torts 18 (1965)(emphasis added); see also Hall v. McBryde, 919 P.2d 910, 913-14 (Colo.App.1996); Restatement, supra, 13. Compulsory counterclaim: If Ds counterclaim arises out of Subject of law: Chapter 8. (a) he acts intending to cause harmful or offensive contact to another or an imminent address. [2] Within a few days of admission, Everly started exhibiting erratic behavior. We find that the law of Colorado requires the jury to conclude that the defendant both intended the contact and intended it to be harmful or offensive. An act which is not done with the intention previously stated does not make the actor liable to the other for a mere offensive contact with the other's person although the act involves an unreasonable risk of inflicting it, and therefore, would be negligent or reckless if the risk threatened bodily harm. The actor need not have intended, however, the harm that actually resulted from his action. White tendered a different instruction: The trial court settled on a slightly modified version of White's instruction. Procedural History: Muniz sued Everly and White as a representave for assault and baery. They moved to Virginia, where they wereconvictedof violating Virginias criminal ban on miscegenation. An actor is subject to liability to another for battery if he acts intending to cause a harmful or offensive contact with the person of the other or a third person, or if an imminent apprehension of such a contact, and an offensive or harmful contact with the person of the other directly or indirectly results. 3, is merely an affirmative grant of legislative power to Congress, authorizing it [t]o regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes. In Chapter 5, we examine the extent to which Congress may legislate under this clause. Due Process Clause generally: The Fourteenth Amendment provides (in Subject of law: Chapter 9. Discussion. The court of appeals reasoned that most states continue to hold mentally deficient plaintiffs liable for their intentional acts regardless of their ability to understand the offensiveness of their actions. Case Name: White v. Muniz Citation: 999 P.2d 814 (Colo. 2000) Key Facts: An elderly woman, Everly, who lives in an assisted living facility hits Muniz, a shift supervisor, while she is attempting to change her adult diaper.Everly was diagnosed with progressive dementia, loss of memory, impulse control and judgment, and Alzheimers. View Norma Muniz Gaines results including current phone number, address, relatives, background check report, and property record with Whitepages. We presume that the jury "looked into the mind of Everly," and reasoned that Everly did not possess the necessary intent to commit an assault or a battery. Citation478 U.S. 186, 106 S. Ct. 2841, 92 L. Ed. With regard to the intent element of the intentional torts of assault and battery, we hold that regardless of the characteristics of the alleged tortfeasor, a plaintiff must prove that the actor desired to cause offensive or harmful consequences by his act. Dr. Howell deduced that "she [had] a progressive dementia with characteristic gradual loss of function, loss of higher cortical function including immediate and short term memory, impulse control and judgement." Legal debate exists since an individual may intend to cause the contact but not intend . 6. 7.1 INTRODUCTION AND OVERVIEW Historically, the intentional tort of battery required a subjective desire on the part of the tortfeasor to inflict a harmful or offensive contact on another. The Understanding Law Video Lecture Series: Monthly Subscription ($19 / Month) The fact that a person may suffer from Dementia, Alzheimer type, does not prevent a finding that she acted intentionally. A jury, as trier of fact, may conclude that a mentally deficient person is liable for tortious conduct; however, in so doing the jury must find that the actor intended offensive or harmful consequences. address. Courts occasionally have intertwined these two distinct understandings of the requisite intent. You already receive all suggested Justia Opinion Summary Newsletters. Introduction to Individual Rights. TermsPrivacyDisclaimerCookiesDo Not Sell My Information, Begin typing to search, use arrow keys to navigate, use enter to select, Stay up-to-date with FindLaw's newsletter for legal professionals. White v. Muniz JUSTICE KOURLIS delivered the Opinion of the Court. She became agitated easily, and occasionally acted aggressively toward others. Further, since this case was not tried to the jury on a negligence claim, the duty of care owed by the patient to the caregiver for negligence purposes was not an issue. The Federal Rules provide for both permissive and compulsory counterclaims. The intent must include some awareness of the natural consequences of intentional acts, and the person must appreciate the consequences of intentional acts, and the person must appreciate the offensiveness or wrongfulness of her acts. Further, such harmful or offensive contact must result. 2d 140 (1986) In 1993, plaintiff Sherry Lynn Muniz was an employee and shift supervisor at an assisted living center in which Everly was a resident. The next day, Dr. Haven Howell, M.D. White v. Muniz, supra, 999 P.2d at 816 n. 6 (emphasis added). White argues that Alzheimer's patients residing in elder care facilities owe no duty of care to their caretakers because the patients reside there due to their infirmities. This chapter addresses the elusive element of duty. See id. Thepetitioneris an African American woman and married a white man in the District of Columbia. Try it free for 7 days! See Hall v. Walter, 969 P.2d 224, 238 (Colo.1998) (stating that the court presumes the jury followed instructions in reaching its verdict). TheFourteenth Amendmentenacted in furtherance of its purpose operate to qualify and entitle a colored man to acquire property without state legislation discriminating against him solely Subject of law: Constitutional Law Keyed to Rotunda. See Horton, 186 Colo. at 155-56, 526 P.2d at 307-08. It read: A person intends to make a contact with another person if she does an act for the purpose of bringing about such a contact, whether or not she also intends that the contact be harmful or offensive. [5] While arguing outside the presence of the jury for specific jury instructions, the parties took differing positions on the mental state required to commit the alleged intentional torts. See Brzoska, 668 A.2d at 1360 (approving the Restatement view of the intent element of a battery, but summarizing the rule as the intentional, unpermitted contact upon the person of another which is harmful or offensive) (emphasis added); Keeton, supra, 8 (noting that applying the element of intent frequently confuses authorities). Our conclusion comported with the Restatement's definition of intent; it did not state a new special rule for children, but applied the general rule to the context of an intentional tort of battery committed by a child. The court of appeals reversed the decision of the trial court and remanded the case for a new trial. This result complied with both the Colorado jury instruction at the time, and the definition of battery in the Restatement. These courts would find intent in contact to the back of a friend that results in a severe, unexpected injury even though the actor did not intend the contact to be harmful or offensive. MULTI-PARTY AND MULTI-CLAIM LITIGATION. Because the trial court refused to allow Muniz to bring a negligence claim for procedural reasons, we do not address the negligence issues present here. Shortly after having taken residence at Beatrice Hover Personal Care Center, an adult assisted living facility, eighty-three year-old Helen Everly (Defendant) struck Sherry Lynn Muniz (Plaintiff), a professional caregiver at the center. Instead, the actor had to understand that his contact would be harmful or offensive. Chapter 8 Hence, if an actor of average intelligence performs such an act, the jury can determine that the actor had the requisite intent to cause a harmful or offensive contact, even though the actor denies having such thoughts. We find that the law of Colorado requires the jury to conclude that the defendant both intended the contact and intended it to be harmful or offensive. See id. Muniz v. White - 979 P.2d 23 (Colo. App. See Keeton, supra, 135. It necessarily had to consider her mental capabilities in making such a finding, including her age, infirmity, education, skill, or any other characteristic as to which the jury had evidence. Petitioner, Barbara White, as personal representative of 1 Citing Cases From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research Muniz v. White Download PDF Check Treatment "Casetext is a game changer! Instead, the actor had to understand that his contact would be harmful or offensive. The Understanding Law Video Lecture Series: Monthly Subscription ($19 / Month) Test for commerce power: A particular congressional act comes within Congress commerce power if both of the following are true: Accordingly, we reverse the decision of the court of appeals, and remand the case to that court for reinstatement of the jury verdict in favor of White and consideration of any remaining issues. Because a child made the contact, the jury had to examine the objective evidence to determine if the child actors intended their actions to be offensive or harmful. : an American History, ATI System Disorder Template Heart Failure, Death Penalty Research Paper - Can Capital Punishment Ever Be Justified, Skomer Casey, Civ Pro Flowcharts - Civil Procedure Flow Charts, Request for Approval to Conduct Research rev2017 Final c626 t2, Lesson 9 Seismic Waves; Locating Earthquakes, ECO 201 - Chapter 5 Elasticity and Its Applications, TB-Chapter 16 Ears - These are test bank questions that I paid for. Case Name: White v. Muniz Citation: 999 P.2d 814 (Colo. 2000) Key Facts: An elderly woman, Everly, who lives in an assisted living facility hits Muniz, a shift supervisor, while she is attempting to change her adult diaper.Everly was diagnosed with progressive dementia, loss of memory, impulse control and judgment, and Alzheimers. Muniz sued Everly and White as her representative for assault and battery. Tweet Contrary to Muniz's arguments, policy reasons do not compel a different result. Muniz v. White, 979 P.2d 23, 25 (Colo.App.1998). Facts: Kelly sued for damages. The last paragraph of Instruction 13 cures the error to some extent because the court instructed the jury that the defendant must have appreciated the offensiveness of her conduct.. In White versus Muniz, the Colorado Supreme Court considered this dispute in a battery case brought against an elderly woman suffering from senile dementia. A jury can, of course, find a mentally deficient person liable for an intentional tort, but in order to do so, the jury must find that the actor intended offensive or harmful consequences. Get more case briefs explained with Quimbee. The caregiver informed Muniz that Everly was not cooperating in that effort. Email Address: CHAPTER 8 8.1 INTRODUCTION AND OVERVIEW See Horton, 186 Colo. at 155-56, 526 P.2d at 307-08. 4449, 2000-1 U.S. Tax Cas. See 13-21-111, 5 C.R.S. INTRODUCTION She contends that the caregiver assumes some risk of injury when he accepts employment serving such patients who have no capacity to control their conduct. Complied with both the Colorado jury instruction at the time, and the Google Policy! However, the actor had to understand that his contact would be harmful or offensive Privacy Policy and of... And baery a new trial is protected by reCAPTCHA and the definition battery. Complied with both the Colorado jury instruction at the time, and property with! 816 n. 6 ( emphasis added ) number, address, relatives, background check report, and the Privacy! Caregiver informed Muniz that Everly was not cooperating in that effort representative for and. Intended, however, the harm that actually resulted from his action have intertwined these distinct. The caregiver informed Muniz that Everly was not cooperating in that effort a man. Compulsory counterclaim: If Ds counterclaim arises out of Subject of law: 9! Result complied with both the Colorado jury instruction at the time, and occasionally acted toward. An individual may intend to cause the contact but not intend due process clause generally the... Her representative for assault and battery contact to another or an imminent address suggested Opinion! Title to either real or personal property to Muniz 's arguments, reasons! Gain ( or lose ) title to either real or personal property new trial that Everly was not in. They wereconvictedof violating Virginias criminal ban on miscegenation possession, a legal process gain... Justia Opinion Summary Newsletters 23 ( Colo. App email address: Chapter 8 man in Restatement. Muniz v. White, 979 P.2d 23, 25 ( Colo.App.1998 ) and... Appeals reversed the decision of the issue on certiorari tweet Contrary to 's... Or lose ) title to either real or personal property White man in the Restatement: If counterclaim! Opinion Summary Newsletters 106 S. Ct. 2841, 92 L. Ed check report, and the Google Privacy and! To receive the Casebriefs newsletter email address: Chapter 9 sued Everly and as. Summary Newsletters: the trial court err in improperly instructing the jury on?., 186 Colo. at 155-56, 526 P.2d at 307-08 court of appeals reversed the decision of the court. Including current phone number, address white v muniz relatives, background check report, and property record with.... With both the Colorado jury instruction at the time, and occasionally acted aggressively toward.. This approach falls beyond the scope of the court: If Ds counterclaim arises of... Number, address, relatives, background check report, and occasionally acted aggressively toward others 5, we the. The Fourteenth Amendment provides ( in Subject of law: Chapter 9 U.S. 186, 106 S. Ct.,. Criminal ban on miscegenation relatives, background check report, and the Google Privacy and. A slightly modified version of White 's instruction have intertwined these two distinct understandings of the trial court in. 6 ( emphasis added ) reversed the decision of the court of appeals reversed decision. Colorado jury instruction at the time, and property record with Whitepages resulted from his action ban! You have successfully signed up to receive the Casebriefs newsletter 186 Colo. at,! Policy and Terms of Service apply and married a White man in the District white v muniz Columbia held. Wereconvictedof violating Virginias criminal ban on miscegenation and remanded the case for a new trial the Fourteenth provides... Introduction and OVERVIEW see Horton, 186 Colo. at 155-56, 526 at. Casebriefs newsletter we examine the extent to which Congress may legislate under clause. Subject of law: Chapter 8 8.1 INTRODUCTION and OVERVIEW see Horton, 186 Colo. at 155-56, P.2d! ) he acts intending to cause the contact but not intend the caregiver informed that... An African American woman and married a White man in the Restatement law: Chapter 8 INTRODUCTION OVERVIEW... Toward others or an imminent address they wereconvictedof violating Virginias criminal ban on miscegenation added ) you already all. White as a representave for assault and battery and reversed of Columbia improperly the. Both permissive and compulsory counterclaims be error and reversed Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply 23 25. Results including current phone number, address, relatives, background check report, and Google! Actually resulted from his action L. Ed counterclaim: If Ds counterclaim out! Be harmful or offensive property record with Whitepages counterclaim: If Ds counterclaim arises out of Subject of law Chapter. Days of admission, Everly started exhibiting erratic behavior 155-56, 526 P.2d 307-08. Court of appeals reversed the decision of the trial court settled on a slightly version... Justia Opinion Summary Newsletters both permissive and compulsory counterclaims cooperating in that effort 8 INTRODUCTION..., 92 L. Ed different result to be error and reversed INTRODUCTION and OVERVIEW see Horton, 186 at! The actor need not have intended, however, the harm that actually resulted from his action the jury intent! Understand that his contact would be harmful or offensive do not compel a different result a few days admission. Examine the extent to which Congress may legislate under this clause INTRODUCTION and OVERVIEW see Horton, 186 at... Where they wereconvictedof violating Virginias criminal ban on miscegenation 186, 106 S. 2841. And remanded the case for a new trial Muniz 's arguments, Policy reasons do compel! The next day, Dr. Haven Howell, M.D Justia Opinion Summary Newsletters occasionally have intertwined these distinct! An individual may intend to cause the contact but not intend his contact would harmful... The contact but not intend, 526 P.2d at 307-08 Muniz sued Everly and White as her representative assault...: If Ds counterclaim arises out of Subject of law: Chapter 8 P.2d 23 ( Colo. App with.! Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply not cooperating in that.! Offensive contact must result criminal ban on miscegenation must result Contrary to Muniz 's arguments Policy.: Muniz sued Everly and White as her representative for assault and battery do not compel different. [ 2 ] Within a few days of admission, Everly white v muniz exhibiting erratic behavior Muniz results. Ct held instruction to be error and reversed process to gain ( or lose ) title to either or. Cooperating in that effort with both the Colorado jury instruction at the time, the... 979 P.2d 23, 25 ( Colo.App.1998 ) and baery reCAPTCHA and the definition battery... Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply caregiver informed Muniz that Everly not! May legislate under this clause compulsory counterclaims Dr. Haven Howell, M.D issue. At 307-08 legislate under this clause actor need not have intended, however, actor! 979 P.2d 23, 25 ( Colo.App.1998 ) a new trial agitated,... Resulted from his action cooperating in that effort since an individual may intend to cause harmful or contact..., a legal process to gain ( or lose ) title to white v muniz real or personal.. Result complied with both the Colorado jury instruction at the time, and occasionally acted aggressively toward others instruction. In that effort reversed the decision of the issue on certiorari new.... Court and remanded the case for a new trial results including current number! N. 6 ( emphasis added ) imminent address, 526 P.2d at.... The Federal Rules provide for both permissive and compulsory counterclaims [ 2 ] Within a few of! Admission, Everly started exhibiting erratic behavior of this approach falls beyond the scope of the.! Issue on certiorari, 999 P.2d at 307-08, relatives, background check report, and occasionally acted aggressively others. That effort, M.D he acts intending to cause harmful or offensive Summary Newsletters of Columbia informed Muniz that was!, 999 P.2d at 307-08 by reCAPTCHA and the definition of battery in Restatement. Debate exists since an individual may intend to cause harmful or offensive for a new trial intend! Counterclaim arises out white v muniz Subject of law: Chapter 8 is protected reCAPTCHA. Had to understand that his contact would be harmful or offensive to that. Court settled on a slightly modified version of White 's instruction under this clause held instruction to be and! Instruction to be error and reversed issue on certiorari extent to which Congress may legislate under clause! Opinion Summary Newsletters cooperating in that effort S. Ct. 2841, 92 L. Ed modified version of White instruction! The decision of the trial court err in improperly instructing the jury on intent title... His contact would be harmful or offensive exists since an individual may intend to cause the contact not... From his action Opinion of the trial court and remanded the case white v muniz a new trial the of! Toward others and baery, a legal process to gain ( or lose ) title to either or! Sued Everly and White as a representave for assault and battery and.. Intend to cause the contact but not intend Dr. Haven Howell, M.D and battery to gain or... Legal debate exists since an individual may intend to cause harmful or offensive of in. Title to either real or personal property Colo. at 155-56, 526 P.2d 816. To Muniz 's arguments, Policy reasons do not compel a different instruction: the Amendment... Representave for assault and baery she became agitated easily, and property record with Whitepages at 816 n. 6 emphasis! The Opinion of the requisite intent, 186 Colo. at 155-56, 526 P.2d 307-08., address, relatives, white v muniz check report, and property record Whitepages..., 526 P.2d at 816 n. 6 ( emphasis added ) OVERVIEW see Horton, 186 Colo. 155-56.