side‚ hitting her neighbor in the eye and causing permanent damage. What kind of tort claim does the neighbor have? Who are the possible defendants? ------------------------------------------------- The Tort Claim the neighbor has is negligence and product liability. The possible defendants are Mary‚ the manufacturer‚ the distributer‚ the wholesaler‚ and the retailer. The neighbor would sue Mary for negligence because Mary should have never taken off the guard. And the neighbor would sue the
Premium Law Tort Common law
3.24 Negligence‚ liability to third parties theory: negligence- any conduct that is careless or unintentional in nature and entails a breach of any contractual duty or duty of care in tort (that is ‚ those who the auditor could reasonable foresee would rely on the auditor’s report)‚ owed to another person or persons. (a) What are the liabilities‚ if any‚ of the auditor? To whom is the auditor liable? The liabilities are that the auditor had failed to detect a significant embezzlement by a
Premium Law Tort Negligence
The Intentional Tort An intentional tort requires intent to commit an act‚ the consequences of which interfere with the personal or business interests of another in a way not permitted by law. It does not have to be an evil or harmful motive behind the tort. As a matter of fact tort law says intent means that the person intended the consequences of his or her act and knew with certainty that certain consequences would result from the act. The tort I will be discussing is assault and battery.
Premium Injury Tort Damages
Historical Background of Law of Tort: The modern law of torts has evolved through four main stages. In early stage when society was primitive private vengeance and self control were the only remedies available to the wronged person against the wrongdoer. He could get his wrong redressed with the help of his friends or relatives. The second stage of development of civil law was characterized by the state coming into existence when its functions were only persuasive in nature. It did not have enforcing
Free Common law Law Tort
Intentional Torts A. A person acts with intent to produce a consequence if: 1. the person has the purpose of producing that consequence; OR 2. the person knows to a substantial certainty that the consequence will ensue from the person s conduct B. Battery 1. An actor commits battery if he acts intending: a. to cause a harmful or offensive contact to person of other or a third person OR b. to cause imminent apprehension of such contact AND c
Premium Battery Assault Tort law
Assignments PLG-101-1401: Torts & Personal Injury Assignment 1 (based on class 1): View submitted answer Please find on Lexis and read the following case: Watson v. Dixon‚ 130 N.C. App. 47 (N.C. Ct. App. 1998). Then‚ please answer‚ in one to two paragraphs each‚ each of the following questions: ) 1) What were the essential facts of that case? Watson and Dixon were both employed with Duke in the Sterile Processing Department of the Medical Center‚ when Watson began to experience
Premium Negligence North Carolina Rape
An Essay on Clinical Negligence “We have always thought of causation as a logical‚ almost mathematical business. To intrude policy into causation is like saying that two plus two does not equal to four because‚ for policy reasons‚ it should not.” (Charles Foster NLJ 5/11/2004 page 1644). To what extent do you consider that Charles Foster is correct in that causation and clinical negligence should be a “mathematical business” and the courts have‚ by introducing matters of policy‚ confused
Premium Tort Negligence Law
To: Judge Wannabe From: Suzi Homemaker Re: Jim Peters Negligence Lawsuit Date: September 22‚ 2014 SUMMARY OF FACTS Melissa Gilbert of Gravel is Us of Cleveland Ohio‚ has a contract with the State of Ohio do road repairs on I-90. Gravel is Us closed down the road and commenced dynamiting procedures. The company posts a guard and one sign on the highway to make sure that no cars enter the area. The guard fell asleep on the job; Jim did not see the sign and drove into the dynamiting zone where he suffered
Premium Road Warning sign Traffic sign
then only will the law allow compensation. The company will be against giving compensation as they can protect themselves by saying that Alf removed the guard “contrary to instructions”. In this case Alf will clearly be affected by contributory negligence as he had removed the guard to make the job quicker causing him injury. Therefore it will be very difficult for Alf to receive compensation as it was seen in the case Close v Steel Co of Wales where Mr Close didn’t receive any compensation for his
Premium Tort Tort law Negligence
Tort Scenario Paper Crystal Cunningham‚ Robert Harrison‚ Billie Miller‚ Tyler Pierce‚ and Jennifer Sorensen University of Phoenix Business Law BUS415 Page Beetem May 30‚ 2011 Scenario One What tort actions do see and the identity of potential plaintiffs? Intentional battery - (Plaintiff‚ Malik v. Ruben) Malik can file a claim against Ruben for pushing him. Ruben would be liable for any physical harm sustained due to the physical contact. Unintentional negligence- (Plaintiff‚ Malik
Premium Tort