Vosburg v. Putney, 80 Wis. 523, 50 N.W. 403 (Wisc. 1891).
Facts
The plaintiff was a young boy who suffered an injury to his leg just below the knee. Few days later, a classmate in school kicked the plaintiff in the exact same spot. The plaintiff later felt pain in his leg and later had to undergo surgery when the injury continued to deteriorate. The plaintiff later lost the use of the injured leg.
Issue
Is a defendant in an action for battery liable for damages arising from unforeseen injuries?
Holding
Yes, a defendant in an action for battery is liable for damages arising from unforeseen injuries. An intent to harm is not a necessary element of the tort of battery. All that is needed is the intent to touch, plus the “unlawfulness†of the touch, to be held liable for battery.
Analysis
Under the “egg-shell skull†rule, the defendant is liable for “all injuries resulting directly from that lawful act, whether they could or could not have been foreseen by the defendant. The defendant must take the plaintiff as he finds him or her. Another factor taken into consideration was the fact that the kick occurred in a classroom, as opposed to out on the playground. It would be foreseeable to be kicked out in the playground, and perhaps the kick would not have been unlawful where children are expected to physically play with each other. But because the kick occurred in the classroom, the kick was deemed to be unlawful, and therefore constitute battery.
Facts
The plaintiff was a young boy who suffered an injury to his leg just below the knee. Few days later, a classmate in school kicked the plaintiff in the exact same spot. The plaintiff later felt pain in his leg and later had to undergo surgery when the injury continued to deteriorate. The plaintiff later lost the use of the injured leg.
Issue
Is a defendant in an action for battery liable for damages arising from unforeseen injuries?
Holding
Yes, a defendant in an action for battery is liable for damages arising from unforeseen injuries. An intent to harm is not a necessary element of the tort of battery. All that is needed is the intent to touch, plus the “unlawfulness†of the touch, to be held liable for battery.
Analysis
Under the “egg-shell skull†rule, the defendant is liable for “all injuries resulting directly from that lawful act, whether they could or could not have been foreseen by the defendant. The defendant must take the plaintiff as he finds him or her. Another factor taken into consideration was the fact that the kick occurred in a classroom, as opposed to out on the playground. It would be foreseeable to be kicked out in the playground, and perhaps the kick would not have been unlawful where children are expected to physically play with each other. But because the kick occurred in the classroom, the kick was deemed to be unlawful, and therefore constitute battery.