Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 636 views

    Garratt v. Dailey

    Uploaded by

    ankurpatel96706
    Ruth Garratt was visiting her sister and was injured when a 5-year-old boy, Brian Dailey, pulled a chair out from under her as she was about to sit down, causing her to fall and fracture her hip. Garratt sued Dailey for damages. The trial court dismissed the case but the appeals court remanded it for clarification on whether Dailey knew that pulling the chair would cause Garratt to fall and be injured, as that knowledge would determine if Dailey committed a battery against Garratt.

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Garratt v. Dailey

    Uploaded by

    ankurpatel96706
    636 views1 page
    Ruth Garratt was visiting her sister and was injured when a 5-year-old boy, Brian Dailey, pulled a chair out from under her as she was about to sit down, causing her to fall and fracture her hip. Garratt sued Dailey for damages. The trial court dismissed the case but the appeals court remanded it for clarification on whether Dailey knew that pulling the chair would cause Garratt to fall and be injured, as that knowledge would determine if Dailey committed a battery against Garratt.

    Copyright

    © Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Ruth Garratt was visiting her sister and was injured when a 5-year-old boy, Brian Dailey, pulled a chair out from under her as she was about to sit down, causing her to fall and fracture her hip. Garratt sued Dailey for damages. The trial court dismissed the case but the appeals court remanded it for clarification on whether Dailey knew that pulling the chair would cause Garratt to fall and be injured, as that knowledge would determine if Dailey committed a battery against Garratt.

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    636 views1 page

    Garratt v. Dailey

    Uploaded by

    ankurpatel96706
    Ruth Garratt was visiting her sister and was injured when a 5-year-old boy, Brian Dailey, pulled a chair out from under her as she was about to sit down, causing her to fall and fracture her hip. Garratt sued Dailey for damages. The trial court dismissed the case but the appeals court remanded it for clarification on whether Dailey knew that pulling the chair would cause Garratt to fall and be injured, as that knowledge would determine if Dailey committed a battery against Garratt.

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 1

    Garratt v.

    Dailey

    279 P.2d 1091 (Wash. 1955)

    Parties:

    Plaintiff – Ruth Garratt – Person who was visiting sister who was
    about to sit down on chair.

    Defendant – Brian Dailey – Child who pulled chair from Plaintiff.

    Facts:

    Five-year-old Brian Dailey was visiting P and her sister in the backyard of P’s
    home. D moved a lawn chair a few feet sideways in order to sit. P, who was about to
    sit on the same lawn chair that D was sitting in, fell to the ground sustaining hip
    fracture and other injuries.

    Procedural Posture:

    Trial court dismissed P’s claim. P appeals and is asking for damages of
    $11,000 or for a new trial.

    Issue:

    Whether D had knowledge of the fact that his action of moving the chair
    would cause P to fall and become injured?

    Holding:

    The court remands the case for clarification over D’s knowledge of his
    actions.

    Legal Reasoning:

    A battery would be committed if in addition to P’s fall, it was proved that D


    moved the chair and that he knew that with substantial certainty that the P would
    attempt to sit down where the chair was. Even if there were no intent from the D to
    commit harm to P, if he had knowledge of the fact that his actions would cause P
    injury would be enough for him to commit battery. Without knowledge, there would
    be noting wrong about D’s act of moving the chair.

    You might also like