p.m. on 1st November this oil was set alight: the fire spread rapidly and caused extensive damage to the Wharf and to the respondents’ vessels‚ An action was raised against the present appellant by the owners of Sheerlegs Wharf on the ground of negligence. On appeal to the Board it was held that the plaintiffs were not entitled to recover on the ground that it was not foreseeable that such oil on the surface of the water could be set alight (Overseas Tankship (U.K.) Ltd. v. Morts Dock and Engineering
Premium Tort Common law Tort law
productive forces. If there were no development of technology‚ there would be no today’s highly development of human materialistic and mental civilization. In other word‚ technology should guarantee people’s living in a better condition. However‚ human negligence causes letting technology not be suitable to respond possible disasters. For example‚ On August 29 2005 Hurricane Katrina caused over 50 failure of the levees and flood walls which were protecting New Orleans. The failures of the levee and flood
Premium Hurricane Katrina New Orleans Louisiana
lays on the ground from the other 3 bullets that were placed in him. I also can back this up by saying these were at least 12 officers on the spot and Officer Jason Van Dyke was the only officer to shoot. There are 5 elements in which to prove “Negligence Tort” I believe that all 5 can be proven in this case. I believe that the officer will be convicted‚ as well he will be sued for a wrongful death case. The family already settled for a few million dollars from the City. I believe once this trial
Premium
Competence & Negligence Scenario 1: You work for a criminal defense attorney who is arrested outside of the courthouse on charges of inhaling nitrous oxide. He was at the courthouse for a pretrial hearing on a cocaine case. After the hearing‚ he returned to his car. He apparently passed out after inhaling as many as 14 canisters‚ stepped on the accelerator of his car and careened in reverse into a parked car. Nitrous oxide is commonly called laughing gas and induces a mild euphoria. The incident
Premium Crime Law Police
gleaned off the Internet? That’s the question confronting an Alberta judge who must soon decide if a mother’s withholding of professional medical care from her 7-year-old son‚ who eventually died from an acute bacterial infection‚ was criminal negligence or simply a well-intentioned but misguided decision. It’s the second time this year Alberta parents have landed in court because their children died after they refused to take them to a doctor or hospital and instead treated them with remedies
Premium Medicine Health care Bacteria
Questions: 1. Chapter 12‚ Yunker V. Honeywell‚ pg 456-459‚ Questions 1-4 1. The court meant by its statement that negligent hiring and negligent retention “rely on liability on the part of an individual or a business that has been on the basis of negligence or other factors resulting in harm or damage to another individual or their property” (Luthra‚ 2011) and not on “an obligation that arises from the relationship of one party with another” (Luthra‚ 2011). The court meant that “negligent hiring and
Premium Employment
Emily Head CRJU 314 Koppersmith v. Alabama 742 So. 2d 206 (Ala. 1999) Concurrences: Judge Long‚ Judge McMillan‚ and Judge Fry Dissents: N/A Facts: Koppersmith and his wife Cindy were fighting in their front yard when Cindy tried to go inside. As she tried to enter the house Koppersmith stopped her and a physical dispute ensued. Cindy fell off the porch and into the yard. She died from a skull fractures to the back of her head. In Koppersmith’s statement he told police that him and Cindy
Premium Jury Appeal Court
Page 1 1 of 3 DOCUMENTS M.A. MORTENSON COMPANY‚ INC.‚ Petitioner‚ v. TIMBERLINE SOFTWARE CORPORATION and SOFTWORKS DATA SYSTEMS‚ INC.‚ Respondents. No. 67796--4 SUPREME COURT OF WASHINGTON 140 Wn.2d 568; 998 P.2d 305; 2000 Wash. LEXIS 287; CCH Prod. Liab. Rep. P15‚893; 41 U.C.C. Rep. Serv. 2d (Callaghan) 357 October 26‚ 1999‚ Oral Argument Date May 4‚ 2000‚ Filed PRIOR HISTORY: [***1] Appeal from Superior Court‚ King County. 95--2--31991--2. Honorable Phillip Hubbard‚ Judge. DISPOSITION: Court
Premium United States Appeal Supreme Court of the United States
The scenario of this case a very complex matter in terms of the law‚ on the one hand you have the breach of gun/firearms laws and criminal negligence and on the other hand you have involuntary harm to another person. In order to hold the correct person liable‚ we must first examine the core facts and issues of this case which will enable the application of the law to these facts‚ allowing the DPP to be advised in the most suitable and accurate manner. The first and foremost issue to be noted in
Premium Criminal law Tort Reasonable person
Business Law Unit 2: Negligence and Duty of Care Kaplan University 7/13/13 Negligence and Duty of Care Gloria Rodriguez Business Law August 12‚ 2013 Negligence and Duty of Care Scenario: As pedestrians exited at the close of an arts and crafts show‚ Jason Davis‚ an employee of the show’s producer‚ stood near the exit. Suddenly and without warning‚ Davis turned around and collided with Yvonne Esposito‚ an 80-year-old woman. Esposito
Premium