Chapter Text
To begin with analyzing the torts in the Magnus Archives we must first discuss what a tort is and who may be liable (legally culpable) for it.
A tort is a wrongful act or an infringement of a right (other than under contract) leading to civil legal liability.
Liability tends to fall to the person who did it. However, under the doctrine of respondeat superior (employer liability) the employer is liable for the tortuous conduct of an employee with whom they have an employer/ employee relationship with while they are acting within their official duties. There are other instances in which vicarious liability can occur.
With that out of the way, let’s begin listing the torts of the Magnus Archives in chronological order
Invasion of privacy
While this will become an ongoing theme throughout this podcast, the first overt reference to intrusion upon seclusion was mentioned in the third episode. Invasion of privacy is a tort action that tends to come in four varieties: misappropriation of the right to publicity, intrusion upon seclusion, placing the plaintiff in false light, and public disclosure of private facts.
The first chronological cause of action would most likely be intrusion upon seclusion. Intrusion upon seclusion requires two elements: 1) that the act was intentional and 2) the intrusion would be highly offensive to a reasonable person
In episode three, Tim got ahold of Amy Patel’s medical records and gave them to the Magnus Institute. This was both intentional and highly offensive as a reasonable person likely would not want Jon or any future researchers to get ahold of their medical history.
However, consent is a defense in an invasion of privacy action. Should there be information that was not given to us as the listener regarding any statement giver’s degree of consent, Jon, Tim, and the Magnus Institute would not be liable for this tort. To Amy Patel.
Invasion of Privacy:
In episode 12, we once again have an invasion of privacy regarding medical records. However these records were not for the statement giver therefore there was almost certainly no consent given. Furthermore there is another instance of invasion of privacy when Sasha got ahold of Toby Carisle’s medical records in episode 18.
Negligence
In episode 15, were an incident to happen to Martin at the hands of Angela, Jon would have been negligent in the care of his employees. Negligence is formed of four elements: Duty, breach, causation, and damages. An employer has a duty of care to his employees. In this case, Jon deliberately sent Martin into a potentially dangerous situation, fully aware of the possibility he could become a human jigsaw puzzle which was a breach of that duty. Fortunately for both Martin and Jon, there were no damages and the breach did not cause them. In Jon’s case “Someone had to” would not hold up to scrutiny in a court of law.
Trespass to land:
In many instances during the first, and later seasons of the Magnus Archives, Jon and his employees commit various acts of trespass to land (or trespass). The first direct statement of trespass is in episode 22 when Martin admits to this tort. Trespass to land occurs when the defendant’s intentional act causes a physical invasion on another’s land. Here, Martin intentionally goes into the basement where he meets Jane Prentiss. Martin is liable for trespass
However, since Martin trespassed on his own free time, without being instructed to do so by his employers (or having his employer be aware of it), Jon and the Magnus Institute would not be liable.
False Imprisonment:
In episode 22, Martin recounts Jane Prentiss’ confining him to his flat for thirteen days. This is false imprisonment. False imprisonment is an intentional tort with the following elements: 1) the defendant intends to confine the plaintiff 2) the plaintiff cannot get away and 3) the plaintif is conscious during this confinement. Jane Prentiss intended to trap Martin (or worse). He could not escape without being eaten by worms. And for the majority of it, he was awake. Jane is liable for false imprisonment.
Torts that happened in Episode 39:
Intentional Infliction of Emotional distress:
The other tort that we’ll be seeing a lot of in this podcast. Jane Prentiss commits intentional infliction of emotional distress upon the archive crew for much of the first season. A defendant is subject to liability for the intentional infliction of emotional distress if the defendant by extreme and outrageous conduct intentionally or recklessly causes severe emotional distress to the plaintiff. Extreme and outrageous conduct is conduct deemed to be outside the limits of human decency. Here, Jane Prentiss intentionally causes fear in the archive staff via worms. No reasonable person would believe that it’s okay to send flesh burrowing worms to a research institution without consent or safeguards- least of all for the sole purpose of inciting fear in the employees.
Battery:
Jane Prentiss committed a battery against Jon and Tim when instruments under her control, the worms, burrowed into their skin. Battery is an intentional tort with the following elements 1) the defendant intends to cause a contact with the plaintiff’s person 2) the defendant’s affirmative conduct causes such a contact; and 3) the contact causes bodily harm or is offensive to the plaintiff. Here, Jane intended for the worms to burrow into their flesh, controlled the worms and actively had them do so and both Tim and Jon were harmed in this attack.
Conversion:
Tim commits the tort of conversion when he breaks down the wall in the archives and sprays CO2 over everything. A defendant is liable for conversion if the defendant intentionally commits an act depriving a plaintiff of possession of chattel or interfering with the plaintiff’s chattel in a manner so serious as to deprive the plaintiff of the use of the chattel. Here, Tim’s interference with the wall (breaking it down Kool-aid man style) deprives the Magnus Institute the use of the wall.
However, Tim has the defense of necessity. The privilege of necessity is available to a person who enters or remains on the land of another (or interferes with another’s personal property) to prevent serious harm, which typically is substantially more serious than the invasion or interference itself. The privilege of necessity applies only to intentional torts to property, including trespass to land, trespass to chattels, and conversion. Here, Tim’s harm was getting eaten by worms which was substantially more serious than breaking down a wall and spraying gas.
Here is where torts get interesting. Tort doctrine does not have a singular tort that covers “eating a person’s identity and wearing it like a suit” as the Not them did to Sasha. However, the closest torts have is battery, causing death, and misappropriation to the right of publicity. Misappropriation of the right of publicity is a privacy tort with the following elements: 1) the defendant’s appropriation of the plaintiff’s name, likeness, or identity was unauthorized 2) the appropriation was for the defendant’s advantage—commercial or otherwise 3) the plaintiff did not consent to the appropriation; and 4) the appropriation resulted in injury to the plaintiff. Here the Not them took Sasha’s identity, for the advantage of terrorizing the Eye’s employees and spying on them, Sasha did not consent to being killed and died as a result which every legal mind would agree is an injury. Sasha was the harmed party in multiple torts.
Negligence:
Elias was negligent regarding every incident in the worm invasion. Negligence, as defined earlier, has duty, breach, causation and damages. Similar to Jon’s analysis with Martin, an employer has a duty of care to his employees and Elias breached that duty. However, unlike Jon’s lack of care with Martin, there were damages caused by the negligence. Elias’ negligence was partially to blame for the worm invasion.
Then of course there is the other level of analysis regarding Elias’ relationship to Jane Prentiss’ acts during the worm invasion. While there is nothing in tort law that discusses the vicarious liability of “letting a worm lady into your office building for the sole purpose of terrorizing your employees”, there is vicarious liability for independent contractors.
Jane Prentiss for the purposes of tort liability would be an independent contractor. These are individuals who are contracted to perform a specific duty but “who is not subject to another’s right to control the method and means by which the task is performed or the result reached.” Here, while she was not ‘hired’ in the traditional sense, she was brought to the institute for the purpose of marking Jon.
While those who engage with independent contractors are typically not liable for their tortuous conduct, there are exceptions for abnormally dangerous activities and “the duty of an employer to maintain a safe work environment for employees”.
Here, Elias willfully hires an independent contractor in Jane to create a worm invasion, an abnormally dangerous activity, for the purpose of making the archives an unsafe environment for Jon.
Elias was negligent when it came to the worm invasion.
Quite frankly I don’t think torts are the best avenue for analyzing Elias’ actions. More on that if I ever get around to doing a criminal law bit