{"id":303,"date":"2011-07-15T13:24:02","date_gmt":"2011-07-15T17:24:02","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.miblaw.com\/lawschool\/?p=303"},"modified":"2012-08-24T10:27:23","modified_gmt":"2012-08-24T14:27:23","slug":"white-v-muniz","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/www.miblaw.com\/lawschool\/white-v-muniz\/","title":{"rendered":"White v. Muniz &#8211; 999 P.2d 814 (Colo. 2000)"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Case Name: White v. Muniz<br \/>\nCitation: 999 P.2d 814 (Colo. 2000)<\/p>\n<p><strong>Key Facts<\/strong>: An elderly woman, Everly, who lives in an assisted living facility hits Muniz, a shift supervisor, while she is attempting to change her adult diaper. Everly was diagnosed with progressive dementia, loss of memory, impulse control and judgment, and Alzheimers. Muniz filed a complaint against Everly and White, Everly&#8217;s granddaughter, for assault and battery.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Issue:<\/strong> Whether an intentional tort requires some proof that the tortfeasor not only intended to contact another person, but also intended that the contact be harmful or offensive to the other person.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Holding:<\/strong> Colorado requires dual intent so they rejected the arguments of Muniz and affirmed the trial court.<strong><\/strong> It was proper for the trial court to instruct the jury that Everly &#8220;must have appreciated the offensiveness of her conduct&#8221;<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Case Name: White v. Muniz Citation: 999 P.2d 814 (Colo. 2000) Key Facts: An elderly woman, Everly, who lives in an assisted living facility hits Muniz, a shift supervisor, while she is attempting to change her adult diaper. Everly was diagnosed with progressive dementia, loss of memory, impulse control and judgment, and Alzheimers. Muniz filed &hellip; <\/p>\n<p class=\"link-more\"><a href=\"http:\/\/www.miblaw.com\/lawschool\/white-v-muniz\/\" class=\"more-link\">Continue reading<span class=\"screen-reader-text\"> &#8220;White v. Muniz &#8211; 999 P.2d 814 (Colo. 2000)&#8221;<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[83,18],"tags":[85,87,47],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v15.1.1 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/wordpress\/plugins\/seo\/ -->\n<title>White v. Muniz - 999 P.2d 814 (Colo. 2000) -<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"Case name for White v. Muniz. Issue: Whether an intentional tort requires some proof that the tortfeasor not only intended to contact another person, but also intended that the contact be harmful or offensive to the other person.\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"http:\/\/www.miblaw.com\/lawschool\/white-v-muniz\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"White v. Muniz - 999 P.2d 814 (Colo. 2000) -\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Case name for White v. Muniz. Issue: Whether an intentional tort requires some proof that the tortfeasor not only intended to contact another person, but also intended that the contact be harmful or offensive to the other person.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"http:\/\/www.miblaw.com\/lawschool\/white-v-muniz\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"MiB Law\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2011-07-15T17:24:02+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2012-08-24T14:27:23+00:00\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"http:\/\/www.miblaw.com\/lawschool\/#website\",\"url\":\"http:\/\/www.miblaw.com\/lawschool\/\",\"name\":\"MiB Law\",\"description\":\"Lawschool Notes and Outlines\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":\"http:\/\/www.miblaw.com\/lawschool\/?s={search_term_string}\",\"query-input\":\"required name=search_term_string\"}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"http:\/\/www.miblaw.com\/lawschool\/white-v-muniz\/#webpage\",\"url\":\"http:\/\/www.miblaw.com\/lawschool\/white-v-muniz\/\",\"name\":\"White v. Muniz - 999 P.2d 814 (Colo. 2000) -\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"http:\/\/www.miblaw.com\/lawschool\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2011-07-15T17:24:02+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2012-08-24T14:27:23+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"http:\/\/www.miblaw.com\/lawschool\/#\/schema\/person\/14950d73730da8ecbd5b2d2690155373\"},\"description\":\"Case name for White v. Muniz. Issue: Whether an intentional tort requires some proof that the tortfeasor not only intended to contact another person, but also intended that the contact be harmful or offensive to the other person.\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"http:\/\/www.miblaw.com\/lawschool\/white-v-muniz\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"http:\/\/www.miblaw.com\/lawschool\/#\/schema\/person\/14950d73730da8ecbd5b2d2690155373\",\"name\":\"Andrew\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"@id\":\"http:\/\/www.miblaw.com\/lawschool\/#personlogo\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"url\":\"http:\/\/1.gravatar.com\/avatar\/7e4456f2e886e2b22adb13ba439e70ed?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Andrew\"},\"sameAs\":[\"http:\/\/www.miblaw.com\/lawschool\/\",\"https:\/\/twitter.com\/miblaw\"]}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.miblaw.com\/lawschool\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/303"}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.miblaw.com\/lawschool\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.miblaw.com\/lawschool\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.miblaw.com\/lawschool\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.miblaw.com\/lawschool\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=303"}],"version-history":[{"count":4,"href":"http:\/\/www.miblaw.com\/lawschool\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/303\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":1057,"href":"http:\/\/www.miblaw.com\/lawschool\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/303\/revisions\/1057"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.miblaw.com\/lawschool\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=303"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.miblaw.com\/lawschool\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=303"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.miblaw.com\/lawschool\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=303"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}