Friday Shop and the owners of the apartments (Claimants) to write an opinion to establish if they are able to claim for damages from Boutique Bugs (Defendant) for the amount of $1‚100‚000 based on the elements of the rule in Rylands v Fletcher. Rylands v Fletcher (R v. F) is based on the doctrine of Strict Liability. This means that the defendant is liable for all damages caused by engaging in hazardous of dangerous activities. Blackburn J at 279 states “We think that the true rule of the law is
Premium Escape Tort Legal terms
October 5‚ 2010 Introduction Every year we hear more shocking stories of the mismanagement of a corporation’s funds. Unfortunately for Tyco in 2002‚ it was their company that covered the front pages of the press. Tyco’s CEO and CFO were caught trying to pass a $2‚200 wastebasket and a $6‚000 shower curtain off as company expenses” (Palmer‚ Dunford‚ Akin‚ 2009‚ pg.345). Just months later the new CEO‚ Ed Breen had an overwhelming task ahead of him. He needed to raise morale‚ prove Tyco’s integrity
Premium Corporate governance Change
Procedural History: Plaintiff brought suit against defendant for fraud and breaches of warranty. Summary judgement granted in favor of defendant by the District Court. Plaintiff appealed claiming genuine issues of material facts exist. The Facts: Plaintiff bought a used car from Defendant‚ a used car dealer. Defendant offered no warranty‚ but told Plaintiff that the car had been inspected and was accident free. Plaintiff purchased a service plan through Defendant to be administered by a
Premium Automobile Law English-language films
Affaf Noor Saidi 1. Consider arguments for and against granting bail to each of the following defendants. * Lucy‚ aged 22‚ has been charged with dealing heroin. She was caught with a large amount of the drug in the back of her car. She lives with her parents and has worked as an office assistant for the same employer since leaving school at the age of 16. Bail is when a person is granted temporary freedom provided the person promises to appear at court on a fixed date and pay a certain
Premium Criminal law Jury Crime
1. Citation: United States v. Conti‚ E.D.S.C.‚ Western Division‚ No.5:11-CV-470-F (2012) 2. Facts: In 2011‚ the North Carolina General Assembly passed House Bill 289‚ which approved the DMV to issue speciality license plates. One of these license plates was inscripted with the message “Choose Life.” The Plaintiffs‚ headed by the American Civil Liberties Union of North Carolina‚ and the Defendants‚ Eugene Conti and Michael Robertson‚ who held State positions directly pertaining to transportation
Premium United States North Carolina South Carolina
In the case of State v. Rounds‚ the defense challenges the conduct of Officer Oliver Towns and the evidence his conduct yielded. The defense wages their action on three major cases‚ all of which apply‚ but none in the way cited: Riley V. California‚ 573 U.S. ____ (2014)‚ Wong Sun v. United States‚ 371 U.S. 471‚ (1963) and Carroll v United States‚ 267 U.S. 132 (1925). This case can be narrowed down to three stages: the stop‚ the search and the seizure. All of which‚ when performed‚ obeyed the limits
Premium Supreme Court of the United States United States Constitution United States
Starting with January 22‚ 1973 an entire generation has been sacrificed on the altar of “free choice.” On December 13‚ 1971 the Supreme Court argued for the first time the case of an unmarried pregnant woman identified only as Jane Roe in order to maintain her anonymity. Jane Roe‚ later recognized as Norma McCorvey‚ was a Texas resident who wanted to have an abortion during the time when the existing state law banned abortion except to save the mother’s life. Having no other choice to obtain her
Premium Abortion Roe v. Wade Pregnancy
Patrick Haines JLC 101 Prof. Edelson 9/11/14 Hawkins v McGee case brief Case Name: Hawkins v. McGee‚ 84 N.H. 114‚ 146 A. 641.(1929) Facts: Mr. Hawkins‚ the Plaintiff had undergone reconstructive surgery by Dr. McGee‚the defendant‚ in order to remove scar tissue on his hand that had resulted from an electrical wire accident nine years prior to the transaction. The procedure called for the removal of the scar tissue from his palm and the grafting of skin from his chest in its place. When asked about
Premium United States Supreme Court of the United States Jury
1 2 CASE NOTE: AUSTRALIAN CRIME COMMISSION V STODDART1 I INTRODUCTION The High Court of Australia held in Australian Crime Commission v Stoddart (2011) that a privilege against spousal incrimination does not exist at common law. This provides that a spouse sworn in as a witness loses the right to call on the privilege to refuse to answer a question at the risk of incriminating the other spouse. This case note will outline the key issues of the case‚ analyze both the High Court majority
Premium Common law Law Crime
testimony of his co-defendant‚ John Bryant‚ Jr.‚ to be considered against him; (5) that the Court erred in permitting the jury to separate overnight on the last day of the trial; and (6) that there were certain erroneous instructions. (Law Justia: State v. Mouzon (1957)‚ n.d.) Holding
Premium Crime Murder Capital punishment