III. Count LVII should be dismissed because it fails to state a cause of action.
Count LVII of the Seventh Amended Complaint attempts to state a cause of action for battery. This count also fails to state a cause of action and Frances House requests that it be dismissed with prejudice.
The Plaintiffs attempt to allege that the corporation, Frances House, Inc., committed a battery upon Leitzen. The elements of a claim for battery consist of “(1) an intentional act on the part of the defendant; (2) a resulting offensive contact with the plaintiff’s person; and (3) a lack of consent to the defendant’s conduct.” McNeil v. Brewer, 304 Ill. App. 3d 1050, 1055 (3rd Dist. 1999). A corporation is not a physical entity that can actually make contact with an individual, and therefore, although it could in certain circumstances be liable for an employee committing an intentional tort, the corporation…show more content… Plaintiffs make this allegation despite Plaintiffs’ admitting that a court did not declare Leitzen disabled until October 2, 2007, five years after he moved into Ridge Terrace and after Leitzen’s physicians prescribed the medications. (See the Order of Adjudication of Disability and Appointing Guardian attached as Exhibit A to the 7th Am. Compl.) If there was a lack of informed consent, then this count is a negligence claim. Additionally, several times in their complaint, Plaintiffs allege that Leitzen was prescribed psychotropic medications. (7th Am. Compl. ¶ 9, 7th Am. Compl. Cnt. XLIX ¶ 52, 7th Am. Compl. Cnt. L ¶ 19, 7th Am. Compl. Cnt. LII ¶ 27, 7th Am. Compl. Cnt. LIII ¶ 53, 7th Am. Compl. Cnt. LIV ¶ 19, 7th Am. Compl. Cnt. LVI ¶ 27.) These inconsistent facts, in conjunction with the failure of the Plaintiffs to allege who actually prescribed or administered the medicine, provide additional reasons for the dismissal of Count