Dawn tested consumer food products at her house and published the results in Dawn's Cyberspace Homepage, a monthly Internet newsletter. One month Dawn tested Hornet Snacks, a regionally distributed food product from her hometown of Mountain City

Question

Unfortunately, the review was terrible and Kelly Armoire, the President of Hornet Snacks, was outraged. Kelly visited Dawn at her home in an attempt to convince her to retract her review, but was unsuccessful. After his efforts failed, Kelly drew an unloaded pistol from his jacket and pointed it a Dawn and said, "I'm going to blow you away.". Kelly knew the gun was unloaded, but Dawn did not. After a few seconds, he put the gun away and left while muttering "I also hate rabbits.". Has Kelly committed a tort?

Answer 1

Did Kelly commit the tort of assault when he drew and pointed the unloaded gun at Dawn? Assault is an intentional, unexcused, unprivileged threat of force that creates in the mind of another person a reasonable apprehension or fear of an immediate harmful or offensive contract.
To be tort-specified, conduct must be regarded in the law as wrongful. Through the development of statutory or common law, it must be recognized that specific behavior or acts that
lead to harm of others are wrongful. It appears that Kelly committed the tort of assault when he drew the pistol from his jacket and pointed it at Dawn. The facts do not tell us what Dawn's reaction was, but a reasonable person would be in fear of being shot and perhaps killed by Kelly. The fact the gun was unloaded is immaterial to Dawn, because she was unaware it was unloaded thus her fear would be of a loaded gun. There is no battery because there was no contact. The threat
was immediate and any apprehension or fear of the touching would thus be justified. The intent required is the intent to cause the fear or apprehension; it does not appear that Kelly could reasonably argue he intended anything else.
There are no facts that suggest that there were defenses to Kelly's behavior. The fact he was angry and felt mistreated does not give him the right to threaten and cause another to fear for her life.
Kelly committed the tort of assault for which Dawn may seek damages.
A discussion of battery is fine, although it should be concluded that it does not exist. A discussion of intentional infliction of emotional distress is alright, as long as assault is discussed correctly. Kelly also committed the crime of assault, which may be a misdemeanor or felony. The question is not about the crimes, however. A discussion of compensatory damages and or punitive damages, if well done, should receive credit.