P was a mathematician with NASA attending a conference at D's hotel.
While in the buffet line, P was approached by an employee of D who snatched the plate from his hand and shouted that "a Negro could not be served in the club."
The employee did not make physical contact with P, but P was highly embarrassed and offended in front of his colleagues.
P sued D for battery.
Procedural History:
Trial court found for P, judge set aside the verdict.
TX COA affirmed, found for D.
TX Supreme Court reversed, found for P.
Issues:
Does the snatching or knocking of an object closely attached to an individual constitute battery even though there was no actual physical contact to the individual's body?
Holding/Rule:
The snatching or knocking of an object closely attached to an individual constitutes battery even though there was no actual physical contact to the individual's body.
Reasoning:
The essence of P's complaint in a case of battery is the offense to the dignity of the person because of the unpermitted touching.
Intentional and offensive touching of anything that is so closely connected to the body of a person is to be viewed as part of the person.
In action based in battery, damages for mental suffering are recoverable without a showing of actual physical harm.
Dissent:
None.
Notes:
Touching of "objects" can constitute battery (like clothing).
Extended the definition of "the person of another." (means anything closely related to a person so that it could be considered part of that person). Prof argues that this is a slippery slope.
