Spivey v. Battaglia
Nature of the Case
This case was an appeal from a denial of damages for a personal injury and the summary judgment dismissing the action.
Facts
Spivey (P) and Battaglia (D) were employed at the same company and Battaglia was aware of Spivey’s shyness. He intentionally put his arm around Spivey and pulled her head towards him to tease her. She suffered a sharp pain in the back of her neck, ear, and skull and became paralyzed on the left side of her face and mouth.
Spivey brought this lawsuit against Battaglia for negligence and assault and battery. Battaglia moved for a summary judgment based on the statute of limitations contending that Spivey’s action for the assault and battery against his friendly unsolicited hug was barred by the statute of limitations. Spivey’s motion was granted and was affirmed on appeal. Spivey appealed that ruling and asserted that the action could be maintained on a negligence count which was not barred by the statute of limitations.
Issue
- Is the knowledge and appreciation of a risk, short of a substantial certainty sufficient for a finding of an intent to commit an intentional tort?
Holding and Rule of Law
- No. Knowledge and appreciation of a risk that is short of a substantial certainty is not sufficient to find an intent to commit an intentional tort.
When a person acts with knowledge or substantial certainty that a particular result will follow, that party is liable for all results from the act regardless of how unforeseeable. Knowledge and appreciation of a risk that is short of a substantial certainty is not sufficient to find an intent to commit an intentional tort with virtually unlimited liability for unforeseen results.
The difference between intent and negligence is a matter of degree. The line is drawn when a known danger ceases to be only a foreseeable risk which a reasonable man would avoid and then becomes a substantial certainty.
In this case it cannot be said that the partial paralysis was substantially certain to occur as the result of a friendly unsolicited hug. No reasonable person would believe that such a bizarre result was substantially certain to occur.
If a party acts without the knowledge or substantial certainty, he will be liable only for those harms that are reasonably foreseeable consequences of his act. The result in negligence depends on the surrounding circumstances. The negligence cause of action should have been submitted to the jury.
Disposition
Reversed and remanded.