Intentional Tort is a purposeful act committed by a person against another person that results in harm. In this case it is a nursing assistant harming a patient. An example is a nurse put poison in the patient’s food to inflict harm on them. The case I found was about 16 year old Rachelle Harris. On July 4th‚ 1988 Rachelle tried to commit suicide and was checked into a psychiatric unit of Baptist Hospital. Rachelle was then raped by a nursing assistant on July 16th‚ 1988. Dr. Isabelle L. Ochsner
Premium Rape Sex Suicide
Intentional Tort of Defense Erica Davis Introduction to Tort June 7‚ 2012 Facts On a Saturday night there were an incident between two males and a female in a bar called Bottom’s Up. A man name John had too much to drink and was intoxicated. He was shouting obscenities toward a lady name Jane that was sitting at a table next to another guy name Leroy‚ which he was a frequent customer. However‚ Jane ignored John and continued to drink her beer. When she ignored him than he approached her looking
Premium Tort law Injury Grammatical person
Torts and Damages I . Concept/ Definition The term “Tort” is of Anglo-American law-common law which is broader in scope than the Spanish-Phil concept which is limited to negligence while the former includes international or criminal acts. Torts in Philippine law is the blending of common-law and civil law system. Quasi Delict refers to acts or omissions which cause damage to another‚ there being fault or negligence on the part of the defendant‚ who is obliged by law to pay for the damages done
Premium Tort Law
Issues Identified: 1. Whether William has an action in common negligence against Edmund. 2. Whether Sam has action in rescuer’s duty against Edmund 3. Whether William has an action in vicarious liability against TCS 4. Whether Sam has an action in vicarious liability against TCS Pleadings: 1. William v Edmund A. Duty of care Foreseeability – there will be accidents if bus isn’t checked properly and if Edmund doesn’t watch the road. Fair just reasonable. Proximity – safety of William depended
Premium Tort Tort law Negligence
is not forcing Liebeck to buy their coffee at gunpoint. Neither is Liebeck pressuring McDonald’s to sell her their coffee. The second principle‚ on the other hand‚ requires that both the seller and buyer must have a reasonable amount of information about the product (Brusseau‚ 2012). On this principle‚ McDonald’s made the mistake of not mentioning that the coffee cup could splash out when it is opened and that it is hot enough to cause third-degree burns (Brusseau‚ 2012). Liebeck failed to obtain
Premium Free market Capitalism Political philosophy
2011‚ p. 209). Then‚ it has the third element‚ the specificity‚ which means in its ad WHIRETIME‚ Inc.‚ specified the particular party‚ business and product (Melvin‚ S.P.‚ 2011). Janet has signed a contract with BUGusa she is committing intentional tort because she is intentionally leaving one company knowing that she has an agreement. She is intentionally leaving them to go work for the competitor so that she can get more money. She can be held liable for any harm or money loss for BUGusa because
Premium George W. Bush Law enforcement agency
his mining activities. Dana sues John for trespass to land. 1) John claims that he is not liable for trespass to land because he did not conduct any activity that is above ground on Dana’s land. Based on the courseware and your own knowledge of tort law‚ explain why John is correct or incorrect. There is no need to cite any cases for this question. 2) John next claims that he is not liable for trespass to land because he did not intentionally mine under Dana’s land. Please find and cite a single
Premium Tort Tort law
Concurrent liability Text [13.45] – [13.65]‚ [13.80] – [13.120] Vicarious liability is the liability of an employer for a tort committed by an employee within the course of employment Stevens v Brodribb sawmilling the existence of control between an employer and employee is not enough to prove a relationship for vicarious liability. Further criteria such as obligation to work‚ hours to work etc is also considered Elazac pty ltd v Sheriff the plaintiff was not an employee but a contractor
Premium Tort law Tort
land‚ or some right over or in connection with is nuisance (Winfield and Jolowich on tort) examples are noise‚ fumes‚ dust e.t.c. There are 3 different actions in nuisance but the ones of concern are private‚ public and Rylands and Fletcher (strict liability).the objective of nuisance is to protect an individual’s interest in land. The scenario to be analysed below is to advise Banger of his potential liability in tort since the occupier/ controller of the land (country house)‚ and the creator of the
Premium Tort
1. Evaluate and discuss the potential liability (negligence or other torts) of the various parties in the scenario involving but not limited to Bobby‚ ACE Sports‚ the nurse‚ the surgeon and City General. (Avoid simply restating the facts/scenario. Incorporate them into your discussion.) 2. Be sure to discuss the elements of negligence as they apply to each party separately‚ and also discuss the application of EMTALA. 3. Define comparative negligence and discuss its application to
Premium Hospital Tort law Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services