CASUALTY TERMS & CONCEPTS · 5 MIN READ
Intentional and Dignitary Torts
Intentional torts differ from negligence because the defendant must intend the act — either with the purpose of causing the contact or consequence, or with substantial certainty it will result. Battery is intentional harmful or offensive contact; assault is intentionally placing the plaintiff in apprehension of imminent contact; false imprisonment is intentional confinement within boundaries the plaintiff is aware of or harmed by. Trespass to land requires only an intentional entry onto another's land without consent or privilege — mistake about ownership is no defense and no actual damages are required. Trespass to chattels covers lesser interference with personal property, while conversion is interference so serious that the defendant must pay the chattel's full value. Intentional infliction of emotional distress demands conduct so extreme and outrageous that it exceeds all bounds of decency in a civilized society, plus severe distress — mere insults and threats do not qualify. Defenses include consent, privilege, and necessity. Defamation protects reputation. Libel is written or fixed defamation; slander is spoken and normally requires proof of special (pecuniary) harm — except for the four slander-per-se categories, where damages are presumed: imputing a crime, a loathsome disease, conduct incompatible with the plaintiff's business or profession, or serious sexual misconduct. Truth, privilege (including the common-interest qualified privilege), and pure opinion are defenses. Constitutional law overlays the tort: under New York Times v. Sullivan, a public official or public figure must prove actual malice — knowledge of falsity or reckless disregard for the truth. Prosser's four privacy torts stand alongside defamation: intrusion upon seclusion, public disclosure of private facts, false light, and appropriation of name or likeness. Litigation-abuse and economic torts round out the family. Malicious prosecution requires initiating or continuing a proceeding without probable cause, for an improper purpose, that terminated in the accused's favor — many states add a special-injury requirement for civil cases. Abuse of process is the misuse of properly issued process for an ulterior objective. Tortious interference with contract targets those who intentionally induce a breach, and fraudulent misrepresentation (knowing falsity) contrasts with negligent misrepresentation (careless false statements causing pecuniary loss in reliance). These intentional and dignitary torts matter to insurance because liability policies generally exclude intended injury, creating the coverage battlegrounds the exam likes to probe.
Key rules
Intent means purpose OR substantial certainty that the consequence will follow
A defendant who knows contact or confinement is substantially certain to result intends it, even without a desire to harm.
Why the exam cares: The substantial-certainty prong is the tested edge of intent, separating intentional torts from mere negligence.
Trespass to land needs only intentional entry — no harm, no knowledge of ownership
The intent required is intent to enter, not intent to trespass; nominal damages vindicate possession, and mistake of ownership is no defense.
Why the exam cares: Distractors add damage or bad-faith requirements that the tort does not contain.
IIED requires extreme and outrageous conduct causing severe distress
Conduct must exceed all bounds tolerated by a decent society — a sustained campaign of abusive collection calls qualifies; isolated insults do not.
Why the exam cares: Examiners test the height of the outrageousness bar and the severity requirement.
Slander needs special harm except in the four per se categories
Crime, loathsome disease, incompatibility with business or profession, and serious sexual misconduct are presumed damaging; public-figure plaintiffs additionally must prove actual malice under New York Times v. Sullivan.
Why the exam cares: The per se list and the actual-malice overlay are both direct-recall exam items.
Malicious prosecution requires no probable cause, improper purpose, and favorable termination
The defendant must have initiated or continued the proceeding; abuse of process instead punishes misuse of validly issued process for an ulterior goal.
Why the exam cares: The malicious-prosecution/abuse-of-process pair is a classic confusion the exam exploits.
Numbers to memorize
- 4 — slander per se categories with presumed damages
- 4 — Prosser privacy torts: intrusion, private-facts disclosure, false light, appropriation
Common traps
- Confusing assault with battery — assault is apprehension of imminent contact; battery is the contact itself, and neither requires actual physical injury for assault.
- Confusing trespass to chattels with conversion — minor interference is trespass to chattels, while interference serious enough to force a full-value payout is conversion.
- Confusing libel with slander — libel is written or fixed and presumes damages more readily; slander is spoken and needs special harm outside the per se categories.
- Confusing malicious prosecution with abuse of process — the first attacks a baseless proceeding that ended favorably; the second attacks the misuse of legitimate process for an ulterior purpose.
Memorize the four slander-per-se categories and the four privacy torts as two four-item lists — the exam tests them as straight recall more often than as scenarios.
Test it before the exam does
Our P&C bank drills Casualty Terms & Concepts with AI-explained answers. 20 questions free, no signup.
Taking the P&C exam in your state?
Studying for the Property & Casualty insurance exam? Track every lesson free — progress syncs with the app.
Start free