Also known as: distinctness in kind · different in kind
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A qualitative distinction as opposed to a mere difference in degree or extent. The distinction determines whether an act falls outside authorized conduct, whether an injury supports private recovery for public nuisance, whether an intervening force supersedes original negligence, or whether requested relief exceeds the scope of a default judgment.
Francis, a real-estate agent employed by Field Properties, was authorized to host an open house at Christian's residence. While buyers toured the home, Francis secretly recorded sarcastic commentary about outdated appliances and posted the edited video to her personal account to promote her own brand. The brokerage argued that the self-promotional ridicule differed in kind from the positive marketing duties assigned to Francis.
Birch Media negligently allowed glass bottles in an upper balcony where intoxicated patrons jostled one another. An unforecast downburst storm then caused an intoxicated patron to drop a bottle from the balcony onto Norman below. The resulting balcony-to-ground injury differed in kind from the trampling harm the inadequate stage barriers had threatened.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Federal agents conducted a warrantless search of Bivens's apartment. Bivens sought damages for the invasion of privacy interests protected by the Fourth Amendment. The harm from official misconduct differed in kind from ordinary private trespass or false-imprisonment injuries.
Sedima alleged that Imrex engaged in a pattern of mail and wire fraud that injured its business. The claimed injury arose from the overall pattern rather than from any single predicate act. The resulting commercial loss differed in kind from the harm caused by an isolated fraudulent transaction.
A police department circulated a flyer listing Davis as an active shoplifter. Davis claimed the publication deprived him of liberty without due process. The reputational injury differed in kind from the types of harm that trigger constitutional protection for life, liberty, or property.
A plaintiff must show harm qualitatively different from that suffered by the general public. Economic loss to a business that depends on public access to a recreation area satisfies the requirement when the public at large suffers only recreational inconvenience.
Supporting sources
The force supersedes when the resulting injury falls outside the scope of risk created by the original negligence. A storm that turns a balcony jostling risk into a falling-object injury from above meets the test because the harm type differs from the trampling risk threatened by inadequate stage barriers.
Supporting sources
A default judgment cannot award relief that differs in kind from the demand stated in the complaint. Adding punitive damages or a forward-looking declaratory judgment when only compensatory contract damages were pleaded violates the rule because the new categories are qualitatively different.
Supporting sources
Conduct falls outside the scope when it is qualitatively different from the tasks the servant was hired to perform. Secretly filming and posting sarcastic commentary about a listed home to promote the agent's personal brand differs in kind from the positive marketing duties authorized by the brokerage.
Supporting sources
…acting under color of law, while no less compensable in damages than those inflicted by private parties, are substantially different in kind, as the Court's opinion today discusses in detail. See Monroe v. Pape , 365 U. S. 167, 195 (1961) (HARLAN, J., concurring). It seems to me entirely proper that these injuries be…