Full access allows:
- Solve all tests online without limits;
- Remove all advertisements on website;
- Adding questions to favorite list;
- Save learning progress;
- Save results of practice exams;
- Watching all wrong answered questions.
39. Does the man have a viable claim against the child for trespass to chattels?
A five-year-old child started to tease the dog by pulling gently on its ears and tail. When the man emerged from the store and saw what the child was doing to the dog, he became extremely upset.
A man tied his dog to a bike rack in front of a store and left the dog there while he went inside to shop. The dog was usually friendly and placid.
Comments (0)
There are no comments at the moment. If you found an error or think question is incorrect, tell everyone about it
Only signed in users can write comments
Signin
Most courts hold that trespass to chattels only occurs where the plaintiff can prove some actual harm. Where the defendant merely makes contact with the chattel, without taking the chattel out of the plaintiff's possession, the defendant is liable only where some harm to the chattel, or some interference with the plaintiff's use and enjoyment of the chattel, occurs.
A is correct. A trespass to chattels claim requires that, where the defendant merely made contact with the chattel, the plaintiff must show actual harm to or deprivation of the use of the chattel for a substantial time. Here, the child's acts caused emotional distress to the man, but the acts did not result in any actual harm to the man's material interest in the dog.
B is incorrect. This answer reaches the correct answer with the wrong reasoning. Even a small child can commit an intentional tort, such as trespass to chattels, so long as the child is old enough to form an intent to touch. But trespass to chattels requires that the plaintiff show actual harm to or deprivation of the use of the chattel for a substantial time. Here, the child's acts caused emotional distress to the man, but the acts did not result in harm to the man's material interest in the dog.
C is incorrect. Even though the child touched the dog without the man's consent, he will not have a trespass to chattels claim because mere touching, without a showing of any actual harm or a substantial interference with interest in the chattel, is insufficient to sustain such a claim.
D is incorrect. The man's extreme distress is not enough to sustain a trespass to chattels claim against the child, which requires a showing of actual harm or such a substantial interference with the man's property interest, neither of which occurred here.