« Back to Glossary Index

**Group 1: Trespass to the Person**

– Trespass to the person historically involved six separate trespasses: threats, assault, battery, wounding, mayhem, and false imprisonment.
– Most jurisdictions recognize three trespasses to the person: assault, battery, and false imprisonment.
– Intent is presumed from the act itself in trespass to the person.
– Negligence can sustain a trespass to the person cause of action.
– Gross negligence may be sufficient for a trespass to the person claim.
– Assault can be both a crime and a tort in common law jurisdictions.
– Tortious assault can occur without actual physical violence.
– Threats can constitute assault in some jurisdictions.
– Immediate danger perception is crucial for assault claims.
– Battery is any intentional and unpermitted contact with the plaintiff.
– Liability for battery varies by jurisdiction.
– Commonwealth jurisdictions have moved towards substantial certainty for battery.
– Active bodily contact is necessary for battery.
– Plaintiff consent to harmful contact is a key factor in battery.
– False imprisonment is defined as the unlawful obstruction or deprivation of freedom.
– False imprisonment may be a tort of strict liability in some jurisdictions.
– Physical force is not always necessary for false imprisonment.
– The American Law Institutes Restatement provides a four-prong test for false imprisonment.
– Intent to confine the plaintiff is a key element in false imprisonment.

**Group 2: Defenses and Exceptions**

– Consent is a common defense for trespass to the person.
– Informed consent is necessary for medical procedures.
– Some jurisdictions deny relief in civil action for voluntary fight participants.
– Comparative negligence may be used instead of consent as a defense.
– Self-defense is a valid defense for trespasses against a person.
– Reasonable force must be used to protect oneself, others, or property.
– Force used must be proportionate to the threat.
– Defense of property is also a recognized defense in trespass cases.
– Defenses include license, justification by law, necessity, and jus tertii.
– License can be express or implied permission to be on land.
– Justification by law permits entry based on statutory authority.
– Jus tertii defense when land is possessed by a third party.
– Necessity defense when vital to commit trespass, with limitations.
– Exceptions for unintentional intrusions in certain circumstances.

**Group 3: Trespass to Chattel**

– Trespass to chattel does not require showing damages.
– Trespass to chattel is an intentional interference with personal property.
– It includes any interference with personal property of another.
– Lack of consent, actual harm, and intentionality are elements of trespass to chattels.
– Remedies for trespass to chattel include damages, conversion liability, and injunction.
– Trespass to chattel applies to tangible property and can include intangible property in modern applications.
– Trespass to chattels allows relief when a third party interferes with personal property.
– Interference can be as minor as touching or moving property.
– Trespass to chattels has been expanded in the US to cover intangible property.
– Cases like Intel v. Hamidi have ruled on electronic trespass to chattels.

**Group 4: Trespass to Land**

– Trespass to land is associated with wrongful interference with possessory rights.
– Trespass to land involves interference with possessory rights in real property.
– Actionable per se without the need to prove harm.
– Liability for intentional and negligent trespasses.
– Armed trespass with a firearm is considered a serious offense.
– Subsoil, airspace, and permanent attachments are part of land ownership.
– Limitations on absolute dominion over subsurface.
– Trespass when mining minerals beneath another’s property.
– Subsurface invasion by hydraulic fracturing may not be considered trespass.
– Toxic waste migration may constitute trespass if it interferes with reasonable use.

**Group 5: Legal Principles and Landmark Cases**

– Myers v. Baker, Banks v. Fritsch, Scott v Shepherd, Alterauge v. Los Angeles Turf Club, Austin & Anor v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis.
– Online, Inc. v. IMS, eBay, Inc., v. Bidders Edge, Inc.,, Inc., v. Verio, Inc., Roberts River Rides v. Steamboat Dev., Loe et ux. v. Lenhard et al.
– Schanafelt v. Seaboard Finance Co., Balmain New Ferry Co Ltd v Robertson, Bird v Jones, Andrepont v Naquin, Lane v Holloway.
– Torts (Interference with Goods) Act 1977, Crimes (Substituted Section 59) Amendment Act 2007, Gun Law in the UK. Marple Rifle & Pistol Club, 49U.S.C.§40103, United States v. Causby et ux., 328U.S. 256, 260(1946).
– Elliott, Catherine; Francis Quinn, Smith, Kenneth; Denis J. Keenan, Anderson, Owen L., Ledgerwood, Garrett, Trinidade, F.A.

Trespass (Wikipedia)

Trespass is an area of tort law broadly divided into three groups: trespass to the person, trespass to chattels, and trespass to land.

Trespass to the person historically involved six separate trespasses: threats, assault, battery, wounding, mayhem (or maiming), and false imprisonment. Through the evolution of the common law in various jurisdictions, and the codification of common law torts, most jurisdictions now broadly recognize three trespasses to the person: assault, which is "any act of such a nature as to excite an apprehension of battery"; battery, "any intentional and unpermitted contact with the plaintiff's person or anything attached to it and practically identified with it"; and false imprisonment, the "unlawful obstruction or deprivation of freedom from restraint of movement".

Trespass to chattel does not require a showing of damages. Simply the "intermeddling with or use of … the personal property" of another gives cause of action for trespass. Since CompuServe Inc. v. Cyber Promotions, Inc., various courts have applied the principles of trespass to chattel to resolve cases involving unsolicited bulk e-mail and unauthorized server usage.

Trespass to land is today the tort most commonly associated with the term trespass; it takes the form of "wrongful interference with one's possessory rights in [real] property". Generally, it is not necessary to prove harm to a possessor's legally protected interest; liability for unintentional trespass varies by jurisdiction. "At common law, every unauthorized entry upon the soil of another was a trespasser"; however, under the tort scheme established by the Restatement of Torts, liability for unintentional intrusions arises only under circumstances evincing negligence or where the intrusion involved a highly dangerous activity.

Trespass has also been treated as a common law offense in some countries.

« Back to Glossary Index