Baska v. Scherzer

Supreme Court of Kansas · 2007 · Torts

TortsAssault and batteryNegligenceStatute of limitationsTransferred intentassaultbatterynegligence

Facts

At a party at Baska's home, Scherzer and Madrigal began fighting, pushing each other and throwing punches. Baska tried to stop the fight by stepping between them and was hit in the face and head, suffering dental, neck, and jaw injuries. Baska alleged the defendants unintentionally struck her with blows intended for each other. In depositions, both defendants testified they intended to strike and injure the other fighter, not Baska.

Issue

When two defendants intentionally throw punches at each other and unintentionally strike a third person who intervenes, does the injured third person's claim sound in negligence and fall under the 2-year statute of limitations, or in assault and battery under the 1-year statute? Does transferred intent make the defendants' conduct intentional as to the third party?

Rule

Kansas looks to the substance of the claim, not the pleading label. Assault and battery are intentional torts, negligence is unintentional, and under transferred intent a defendant who intends harmful or offensive contact with one person is liable for battery when that intentional act instead causes harmful contact to another; therefore, a claim based on such conduct is governed by the 1-year statute of limitations for assault and battery, not the 2-year negligence period.

🔒

See the holding & full analysis

Create a free KwikCourt account to unlock the rest of this brief — and practice the case.

The court's holding and reasoning
Doctrine tests, pitfalls & exam hypotheticals
10 practice questions + 4 AI-graded essays on this case

Free sample · practice this case

Test yourself

One of 10 multiple-choice questions for this case. Pick an answer to see why.

At a crowded backyard concert in Wichita, Nolan Pierce angrily swung a pool cue at Evan Soto during an argument. Maya Kerr stepped between them and was struck in the shoulder. Eighteen months later, Maya sued Nolan, pleading negligence because Nolan did not mean to hit her.

Which is the strongest argument for Nolan on summary judgment?

Explanation. The majority held that courts look to the substance of the claim, not the pleading label. When a defendant intentionally strikes at one person but hits another, transferred intent applies and the action remains an intentional tort for battery. The defendant need not intend to hit the plaintiff specifically or even know the plaintiff is nearby. Therefore, a suit filed after 1 year is barred by the assault-and-battery statute of limitations.