Wagner v. State

Supreme Court of Utah · 2005 · Torts

TortsGovernmental immunityBatteryIntentional tortsbatteryintent to contactharmful or offensive contactconsent

Facts

Mrs. Wagner was standing in line at a K-Mart when Sam Giese, a mentally disabled patient of the Utah State Development Center, suddenly attacked her from behind and caused serious bodily injury. USDC employees had taken Giese to the store as part of his treatment program and remained there to supervise him, and Giese had a history of violent conduct and posed a danger to the public if not properly supervised. The Wagners sued state entities for failing to properly supervise Giese while he was in state care. The State moved to dismiss, arguing the injuries arose out of a battery, for which immunity was retained under the Governmental Immunity Act.

Issue

Whether Giese's attack constituted a battery for purposes of the Governmental Immunity Act when the Wagners alleged that, because of his mental incompetence, he could not form an intent to harm or offend. More specifically, the question was whether civil battery requires intent to harm or offend, or only intent to make the contact that proves harmful or offensive at law.

Rule

For civil battery, the actor need only intend to make the contact; the actor need not intend harm, injury, or offense, nor appreciate that the contact is harmful or offensive. A battery occurs when the contact is deliberate and the contact is harmful or offensive at law, meaning a contact to which the recipient has not consented either expressly or by implication. Under the Governmental Immunity Act, the State retains immunity for injuries arising out of battery.

🔒

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 neighborhood festival in Columbus, Ohio, Owen Pike sneaks up behind his friend Lena Ortiz and shoves her forward as a prank, expecting she will laugh. Lena instead falls into a table and breaks her wrist. Owen insists he never meant to hurt or offend her.

If Lena sues Owen for battery, which is the best answer?

Explanation. Battery requires a deliberate contact that is harmful or offensive at law. Under the majority rule adopted here, the actor need only intend the contact or be substantially certain it will occur; he need not intend harm, offense, or injury. A good-natured prank does not avoid liability when the contact itself was deliberate and unconsented to.