Cullison v Medley
Citation: Cullison v Medley, 570 N.E.2d 27 (Ind. 1991)
Parties:
- Dan Cullison (plaintiff/appellant)
- the Medleys (defendant)
Facts:
- Cullison asked Sandy Medley (age 16) to come back to his trailer and have a Coke with him. Hours later, she showed up with her entire family and they surrounded him in his trailer trying to intimidate him. Sandy’s father had a holstered revolver that he kept touching and shaking around.
- Cullison was extremely scared and suffered psychological trauma as a result of this run in and other run ins he had with Sandy’s father after this incident.
Procedural History:
- Trial court entered summary judgement for Medley. Cullison appealed
- Court of appeals affirmed, Cullison appealed again
Issue:
- Did the Medleys actions satisfy the elements of assault even though there was no physical injury to Cullison?
- Is emotional harm enough to allow a plaintiff to recover damages?
Rule:
- Any act of such a nature as to excite an apprehension of a battery may constitute an assault.
Holding:
- If they truly did act as is alleged by Cullison then they satisfied the elements of assault.
- Yes, emotional harm is enough to recover damages
Reasoning:
- The shaking of the revolver made Collison extremely anxious that he was about to be shot. This satisfies all the elements of assault if the alleged acts are to be believed. An assault constitutes “a touching of the mind, as opposed to the body”.
Decision:
- Summary judgement motion reversed, remanded to trial court.
Disclaimer: This is not legal advice. This case brief and the others on this website are based solely on my personal understanding of the underlying case. They emphasize the points that my law professors emphasized. You should use them merely as a supplement to your own studies.