Cullison v. Medley
570 N.E.2d 27 (Ind. 1991)
Facts: Cullison flirted with Sandy Medley. Later that evening, Sandy and her mother, father, brother, and brother-in-law showed up at Cullison's door, threatening him and telling him to leave Sandy alone. Father, Ernest, was on crutches but had a holster with a gun on his thigh; Mother, Doris, kept her hand in her pocket but implied that she had a pistol as well. Ernest never drew the gun but he certainly threatened to.
Procedure: Trial court entered a summary judgment for the Medleys; Cullison appealed. Appeals court affirmed, saying that since Ernest never removed his gun from its holster and never explicitly threatened to shoot Cullison, it was not an assault.
Issue: Did Ernest commit an assault (by the standards of summary judgment)?
Holding: Yes.
Reasoning: "It is the right to be free from the apprehension of a battery which is protected by the tort action which we call an assault." "The tort is complete with the invasion of the plaintiff's mental peace." (Court also held that you can recover for emotional trauma with an assault claim.)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
Hi. I just stumbled upon your blog when searching for info on Cullison v. Medley. I am a one L student this year, too. Just started two weeks ago. I've got a law blog I started but so far it just covers my reactions to law school, etc. I think your idea of putting notes online is a good one, though so I may start briefing my cases there. Hope your school year is going well!
Post a Comment