## Facts

- Betty Joyce Spivey and Phillip Battaglia were coworkers at Battaglia Fruit Co.
- During lunch at the workplace, while employees sat on a work table, Battaglia intentionally put his arm around Spivey and pulled her head toward him as a teasing, unsolicited hug.
- Immediately after the contact, Spivey felt sharp pain in her neck and head and developed paralysis on the left side of her face and mouth.
- Spivey and her husband sued Battaglia asserting (1) negligence and (2) assault and battery.
- Battaglia argued the conduct was assault and battery as a matter of law, making the action time-barred under the two-year limitations period for intentional torts.

## Issues

1. Whether an intentional, unsolicited physical contact that was not intended to cause injury constitutes battery as a matter of law when severe injury occurs.
2. Whether a negligence claim may proceed when the harmful result was not substantially certain to follow from the defendant’s intentional contact, avoiding the intentional-tort statute of limitations bar.

## Decision

- The Florida Supreme Court quashed the district court’s affirmance of summary judgment for Battaglia.
- The court held it was error to classify the unsolicited hug as assault and battery as a matter of law.
- The case was remanded with directions to reverse the final judgment, allowing the negligence count to proceed for determination by the trier of fact.

## Legal Principles

- Battery requires intent to cause a harmful or offensive contact, or knowledge that such a result is substantially certain to occur from the act; mere knowledge of a risk is insufficient.
- An intentional touching may be analyzed as negligence rather than battery if a reasonable person would not believe the injurious result was substantially certain to follow.
- Summary judgment is improper where the characterization of the conduct (intentional tort versus negligence) depends on whether substantial certainty of harm can be inferred from the circumstances.
- A defendant cannot convert a claim into a time-barred intentional tort solely because the contact was voluntary when substantial certainty of harm is not established.

## Conclusion

Because a reasonable person in Battaglia’s position would not view severe paralysis as substantially certain to result from an unsolicited teasing hug, the conduct was not battery as a matter of law, and Spivey was entitled to pursue her negligence theory on remand.


Spivey v. Battaglia, 258 So. 2d 815 (Fla. 1972)