HomeCase briefs › Torts

Beach v. Hancock

New Hampshire Supreme Court · Torts
TortsAssaultassaultthreatening display of weaponreasonable apprehensionunloaded pistolfear of immediate harmbreach of the peace

Facts

The defendant pointed a pistol at another person in a threatening manner. The person at whom the pistol was pointed did not know whether it was loaded and was thereby put in fear of personal injury. The pistol was in fact not loaded. A jury returned a verdict, and the defendant challenged the ruling that this conduct amounted to assault.

Issue

Does presenting a pistol at another person in a threatening manner constitute an assault when the pistol is in fact not loaded, but appears to be loaded and creates a reasonable fear of immediate personal injury?

Rule

It is an assault to present a pistol, purporting to be loaded, at another person in a threatening manner and at such proximity that it would be dangerous to life if discharged, where the act causes a reasonable fear of immediate personal harm, even if the pistol is actually not loaded.

🔒

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
Sign up free to see more →
Free sample · practice this case

Test yourself

One of 10 multiple-choice questions for this case. Pick an answer to see why.
Outside a bus stop in Portland, Maine, Nolan Price angrily pulled a revolver from his coat and pointed it at Evan Ross from four feet away, saying nothing but glaring at him. Evan froze because he believed the gun could fire immediately, though the revolver was actually unloaded.

If Evan sues Nolan for assault, which is the best answer?

Explanation. The majority rule is that presenting a pistol, purporting to be loaded, in a threatening manner and at such proximity that discharge would be dangerous, constitutes assault if it causes reasonable fear of immediate personal harm. Actual loading is unnecessary because the law protects against the fear and alarm created by the apparent ability to inflict immediate injury. (Derived from Beach v. Hancock (n.d.).)