Drabek v. Sabley

Citation. 142 N.W.2d 798 (Wis. 1966)

Powered by

Law Students: Don’t know your Bloomberg Law login? Register here

Citation142 N.W.2d 798 (Wis. 1966)

Brief Fact Summary.

Drabek sued for false imprisonment and battery when Sabley held Drabek until he was in police custody, after Drabek threw snowballs at Sabley’s car.

Synopsis of Rule of Law.

Self-defense, defense of a third person, and protection from the commission of a crime are defenses to an intentional tort.

Points of Law - Legal Principles in this Case for Law Students.

This is especially so when the verdict has the trial court's approval.

View Full Point of Law

Drabek and other minors were throwing snowballs at cars when a snowball hit Sabley’s car. Sabley subsequently chased Drabek and took Drabek’s arm, instructing Drabek to get into his car. Sabley took Drabek downtown, and held Drabek until he was in police custody. Drabek sued for false imprisonment and battery and the trial court dismissed the complaint.

Issue.

What are the defenses to an intentional tort?

Held.

Yes. The judgment of the trial court is reversed. The act of putting Drabek into the car constituted false imprisonment, while the act of holding Drabek until he was in police custody constituted battery.

Discussion.

Self-defense, defense of a third person, and protection from the commission of a crime are defenses to an intentional tort.