Nelson v. Carroll
735 A.2d 1096 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · 1999
Facts
Carroll confronted Nelson over a debt, brandishing a handgun. Carroll struck Nelson on the head with the gun, and as he went to strike him again, the gun discharged, shooting Nelson. Carroll claimed the shooting was accidental, but had previously pleaded guilty to assault and illegal possession of a handgun.
Issue
Can a claim of "accident" provide a defense to a civil battery action when the defendant intentionally threatened and struck the plaintiff with a handgun, and the gun discharged during that volitional act?
Holding
No. The court held that an accident claim is not a defense to battery where the defendant intentionally threatened and struck the plaintiff with a gun, and the gun discharged during that volitional act. The motion for judgment on liability should have been granted for Nelson.
Rule
Battery requires a general intent to invade another's physical well-being through harmful contact or apprehension thereof, not a specific intent to cause the resulting harm. If an actor engages in volitional activity intending to violate another's legally protected interest, and a harmful contact occurs, an "accident" defense is insufficient if the contact is part of the intended volitional act or an assault.
Read the full opinion on CourtListener
Case brief last reviewed . Prepared by CaseReader from the published opinion.