Assignment 2
Christina Freeman
1. What court decided the case in the assignment? (2 points)
Court of Appeals of Ohio, First District, Hamilton County.
2. According to the case, what must a party establish to prevail on a motion for summary judgment? (3 points)
In order to prevail on a motion for summary judgment, a movant has the burden to demonstrate that no genuine issue of material fact remains to be litigated; that it is entitled to judgment as a matter of law, and that it appears from the evidence, when viewed most strongly in favor of the nonmoving party, that reasonable minds can come to but one conclusion and that conclusion is adverse to the nonmoving party.
3. Briefly state the facts of this case, using the information found in the case in LexisNexis. (5 points)
The facts of this case are as follows:
1. Paul Nadel was driving his family to school when they went to Burger King for breakfast
2. The coffee cups had lids on them and were placed in a cup holder when given to the Nadels.
3. Evelyn proceeded to taste the coffee through the flap of the lid, and found the coffee to be too hot.
4. The lid “jiggled off” and burned Mrs. Nadel on the leg.
5. She returned the cup to the cup holder.
6. After the cups were placed either on the floor or on the dashboard, Christopher (who was sitting in the middle in the front seat) was then burned from the cups tipping over when Paul made a left turn. Christopher suffered second degree burns.
4. According to the case, why was this not a case of negligent infliction of emotional distress, and what tort did the court approve? (5 points)
The Nadel’s were unable to show any emotional distress where a normal person would be unable to cope sufficiently with the mental distress due to the circumstances of the case. The tort approved by the court was a bystander to an accident states a cause of action for negligent infliction of serious emotional distress, the emotional injuries sustained must be found to be both serious and reasonably
1. What court decided the case in the assignment? (2 points)
Court of Appeals of Ohio, First District, Hamilton County.
2. According to the case, what must a party establish to prevail on a motion for summary judgment? (3 points)
In order to prevail on a motion for summary judgment, a movant has the burden to demonstrate that no genuine issue of material fact remains to be litigated; that it is entitled to judgment as a matter of law, and that it appears from the evidence, when viewed most strongly in favor of the nonmoving party, that reasonable minds can come to but one conclusion and that conclusion is adverse to the nonmoving party.
3. Briefly state the facts of this case, using the information found in the case in LexisNexis. (5 points)
The facts of this case are as follows:
1. Paul Nadel was driving his family to school when they went to Burger King for breakfast
2. The coffee cups had lids on them and were placed in a cup holder when given to the Nadels.
3. Evelyn proceeded to taste the coffee through the flap of the lid, and found the coffee to be too hot.
4. The lid “jiggled off” and burned Mrs. Nadel on the leg.
5. She returned the cup to the cup holder.
6. After the cups were placed either on the floor or on the dashboard, Christopher (who was sitting in the middle in the front seat) was then burned from the cups tipping over when Paul made a left turn. Christopher suffered second degree burns.
4. According to the case, why was this not a case of negligent infliction of emotional distress, and what tort did the court approve? (5 points)
The Nadel’s were unable to show any emotional distress where a normal person would be unable to cope sufficiently with the mental distress due to the circumstances of the case. The tort approved by the court was a bystander to an accident states a cause of action for negligent infliction of serious emotional distress, the emotional injuries sustained must be found to be both serious and reasonably