So how come no one seems to have heard that transferred intent can transfer between people (as everyone knows), but ALSO between torts. The book Understanding Torts and E&E by Glannon point this out. One book cites the case Etcher v. Blitch among other case law.
Also... in terms of battery and assault in which offensive/harmful contact and apprehension are needed, respectively. I was taught in class and it seems pretty obvious to me that we look into the P subjectively. That is, we apply a reasonable person standard to what an offensive contact is- would a reasonable persno find this contact offensive? This applies to apprehension as well- would a reasonable person apprehend a harmful/offensive contact?
example: A touches taps B on shoulder to ask a question about a flight arrival time. B is severely offended and sues A for battery.
Under the reasonable person test, this is not actionable, as a reasonable person in our society would not find such a contact as offensive... as opposed to a push, punch, etc.
Glannon in his EandE point this reasonable person standard out and so do other books, and my professor. However, some people on other boards seem to be completely baffled by this pretty obvious idea. Most of these scholars and judges pull this standard from the language of the Restatement of "offend a reasonable sense of personal dignity".