Madden v. D.C. Transit System

District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Torts

TortsAssaultBatteryIntentional TortsPleadingassaultbatteryintent

Facts

The plaintiff alleged that while standing near the northeast corner and then the southeast corner of 16th and K Streets, N.W., he was assaulted by fumes and offensive oily substances spewed from two buses operated by D.C. Transit System. He sought $70,000 in damages. He further alleged that the transit company knew these by-products were regularly discharged from its buses and asserted that the acts were therefore intentional. The transit company denied liability and argued that the complaint failed to state a cause of action.

Issue

Whether a complaint states a claim for assault and battery when it alleges that bus fumes and oily substances were discharged onto the plaintiff, but does not allege apprehension of immediate harmful or offensive conduct and does not adequately allege intent beyond conclusory assertions of wanton and malicious conduct.

Rule

An essential element of assault is the intentional putting of another in apprehension of immediate harmful or offensive conduct. Battery also requires intent as an essential element. Mere conclusory allegations of wanton or malicious conduct are legal conclusions that a court need not accept and do not adequately plead the requisite intentionality.

🔒

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.

In Seattle, Nora Kim waited beside a downtown shuttle stop when a shuttle owned by Cascadia Loop Transit rolled through a puddle and sprayed gritty water onto her coat. Her complaint alleges the company knew its vehicles often threw up dirty water, but it does not allege that Nora saw the spray coming or feared immediate contact before it hit her.

If Cascadia Loop Transit moves to dismiss the assault count for failure to state a claim, how should the court rule?

Explanation. Assault requires an allegation that the defendant intentionally put the plaintiff in apprehension of immediate harmful or offensive conduct. Here, the complaint alleges contact but not apprehension before the contact occurred. Under the majority rule, that omission makes the assault claim deficient at the pleading stage. (Derived from Madden v. D.C. Transit System (n.d.).)