Leichtman v. WLW Jacor Communications, Inc.
634 N.E.2d 697 (1994)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
An actor is liable for battery if they act with the intent to cause an offensive contact with another person, and intentionally blowing tobacco smoke in another's face constitutes such an offensive contact.
Facts:
- Ahron Leichtman, a nationally known anti-smoking advocate, was invited to appear as a guest on the WLW Bill Cunningham radio talk show.
- The purpose of his appearance, which took place on the date of the Great American Smokeout, was to discuss the harmful effects of smoking and secondary smoke.
- While Leichtman was in the radio studio, Andy Furman, another talk-show host, lit a cigar.
- Furman then repeatedly and intentionally blew cigar smoke in Leichtman's face.
- Leichtman alleged this was done for the purpose of causing him physical discomfort, humiliation, and distress.
- Leichtman also alleged that Bill Cunningham, the show's main host, urged Furman to blow the smoke in his face.
Procedural Posture:
- Ahron Leichtman filed a complaint in the trial court against WLW Jacor Communications, William Cunningham, and Andy Furman.
- The complaint alleged claims for battery, invasion of privacy, and violation of a Cincinnati Board of Health regulation.
- The defendants filed a motion to dismiss the complaint for failure to state a claim upon which relief could be granted.
- The trial court granted the defendants' motion and dismissed the entire complaint.
- Leichtman, as the plaintiff-appellant, appealed the trial court's dismissal to the Court of Appeals of Ohio, an intermediate appellate court.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does intentionally blowing smoke into another person's face constitute a battery?
Opinions:
Majority - Per Curiam
Yes. Intentionally blowing smoke into another person's face constitutes a battery. The court adopted the Restatement of Torts definition, which holds that a battery occurs when an actor intends to cause, and does cause, a harmful or offensive contact. The court determined that tobacco smoke consists of 'particulate matter,' which has physical properties capable of making contact. It defined 'offensive contact' as contact that is offensive to a reasonable sense of personal dignity. Therefore, intentionally directing particulate matter (smoke) into another's face in a manner that is disagreeable or insulting constitutes an offensive contact and is actionable as a battery, regardless of how trivial the incident may seem. The court also held that Cunningham could be liable for encouraging the act and that the employer, WLW, could potentially be liable under the doctrine of respondeat superior, as it is a question of fact whether Furman was acting within the scope of his employment. The court affirmed the dismissal of Leichtman's other claims for invasion of privacy and violation of a health regulation.
Analysis:
This decision clarifies that the 'contact' element of battery is not limited to direct physical touching, like a punch or shove. It establishes that intangible or gaseous substances, such as tobacco smoke, can serve as the medium for an actionable battery if intentionally directed at a person in an offensive manner. This broadens the legal understanding of offensive contact, potentially affecting future cases involving things like noxious fumes, sprays, or even pathogens. The case confirms that the tort of battery protects a person's dignity and inviolability from any form of intentional, offensive physical intrusion.
Unlock the full brief for Leichtman v. WLW Jacor Communications, Inc.