Business Law/BUS 415
March 7, 2011
Tort law addresses conflicts between private individuals or entities to ensure that the injured or aggrieved party receives compensation for their damages and to prevent others from committing the same or similar harms (otto-graph, 2001). There are three different types of tort laws to be discussed in the following scenarios. They are intentional, negligence, and strict or absolute liability tort. Intentional torts include assault and battery, false imprisonment, infliction of emotional distress, misrepresentation, fraud, conversion, disparagement of goods and trespassing (1personalinjurylawyers, 2009).Intentional tort actions require pre-meditated thoughts to commit a wrong act. Unlike intentional tort, negligence is the result of failing to use reasonable care to avoid injuring another. Negligence is the wronged action. Lastly, strict liability involves the ownership of responsibility for the acts being committed. Product liability is the most important strict liability example discussed in this paper. No matter what the intent or negligence of the individual or entity, the manufacturer of the product can be held liable if cause if found.
Scenario 1 Synopsis
Tort actions Involved
The tort action seen in scenario one is assault and battering, pain and suffering, negligence to maintain the stadium, and wrongful termination from a job without proper cause. If Daniel does not have a concealed weapon permit and there is a law in place that forbids the carrying of a weapon, the state could bring charges against Daniel. Identity of potential plaintiffs.
The potential plaintiffs in scenario one are Malik and his wife, and Daniel. for Daniel’s assault on Malik during the football game and causing injury to his two front teeth, and later shooting her husband. Malik is also a potential plaintiff against the stadium owners that did not maintain a handrail sturdy enough for what it was designed for. Daniel is also a potential plaintiff for a wrongful firing from his employer. Other potential plaintiffs could be the city or state on carrying a concealed weapon, or the owners of the football stadium for entering the stadium with a concealed weapon that is against their policy written on the back of the ticket. Potential defendants.
The potential defendants are Daniel because he shot Malik after shoving him and causing his fall that knocked out his teeth. Daniels employer is a potential defendant for wrongful termination of Daniel. Malik is a potential defendant for intoxication and threatening with a weapon. The owners of the stadium are potential defendants for negligence to maintain their facility and adequate police protection for its patrons. Elements of plaintiff’s claim.
Malik’s potential complaint is that he was assaulted by Daniel that caused injury to his teeth and that Daniel shot caused his hospitalization, loss of income, and potential disability or death. Malik’s wife’s complaint is the pain and suffering experienced from the shooting of her husband. Daniel’s potential complaint is a wrongful employment termination without cause and loss of income. Defendant’s possible defense.
Daniel defense involves the escalation of violence from Malik demonstrated by showing up at his car with a gun with the intent of shooting him. Daniel defense is self-defense and the protection of his son. Daniel’s defense could include the potential intoxication of Malik and not knowing what an inebriated mentally unstable individual would do with a gun. Daniels state of mind moments before fired from his job wrongfully for the smell of bear spilled on his son by Malik. Daniels defense to Malik’s wife is that she willingly went along with Malik to cause potentially cause harm to Daniel with his son. The owners of the stadium defense would be to demonstrate competence showing different inspections and repairs made...