Preview

North Carolina Law of Torts

Satisfactory Essays
Open Document
Open Document
3596 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
North Carolina Law of Torts
logan 2e 00 fmt

2004-1-6

12.38p

Page i

North Carolina Torts

logan 2e 00 fmt

2004-1-6

12.38p

Page ii

logan 2e 00 fmt

2004-1-6

12.38p

Page iii

North Carolina Torts second edition

David A. Logan
Roger Williams University Ralph R. Papitto School of Law

Wayne A. Logan
William Mitchell College of Law

Carolina Academic Press
Durham, North Carolina

logan 2e 00 fmt

2004-1-6

12.38p

Page iv

Copyright © 2004 David A. Logan Wayne A. Logan All Rights Reserved

ISBN 0-89089-847-2 LCCN 2003115021

Carolina Academic Press
700 Kent Street Durham, North Carolina 27701 Telephone (919) 489-7486 Fax (919) 493-5668 www.cap-press.com

Printed in the United States of America

logan 2e 00 fmt

2004-1-6

12.38p

Page v

To our students, who keep us learning.

logan 2e 00 fmt

2004-1-6

12.38p

Page vi

logan 2e 00 fmt

2004-1-6

12.38p

Page vii

Contents
Preface Acknowledgments Part I The Basic Negligence Cause of Action xix xxi 1 3 5 8 15 15 19 22 25 27 27 33

Chapter 1 Duty 1.10 Duty 1.20 Misfeasance and Nonfeasance [1] Special Applications of the Misfeasance Rule [a] Negligent Entrustment of Chattel [b] “Negligent Entrustment” and Alcohol [c] Spoliation of Evidence Chapter 2 Duty Despite Nonfeasance: The Special Relationship Exceptions 2.10 Duty Despite Nonfeasance 2.20 Duty Because of a Special Relationship between the Plaintiff and the Defendant 2.30 Duty to Control Another for the Benefit of the Plaintiff Chapter 3 No Duty Despite Misfeasance: Negligent Infliction of Emotional Distress and Negligent Infliction of Pure Economic Harm 3.10 No Duty Despite Misfeasance 3.20 Negligent Infliction of Emotional Distress [1] The Early Cases [2] Johnson v. Ruark Obstetrics and Its Progeny [3] Pre-Impact Fear of Dying [4] Fear of Contracting Medical Condition 3.30 Negligent Infliction of Pure Economic Harm Chapter 4 No Duty Because of the Defendant’s Status: Immunities 4.10 Recovery for Torts

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Good Essays

    “It is our conclusion that there is today no factual justification for immunity in a case such as this, and the principles of law, logic and intrinsic justice demand that the mantle of humanity must be withdrawn.” (Parker v. Port Huron Hospital, Michigan)…

    • 760 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    This article discusses the implication on law regarding both the “Sleeper” and “Troxel” cases. It also discusses the relationship that children share with their siblings, grandparents, teachers, ministers, and neighbors, and it shows how significant these relationships can be to the child.…

    • 1745 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    Jones V. Tsige Case Study

    • 534 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Nonetheless the courts have created approaches to determining their value and allow adjustments to be made given specific circumstances. The courts created a similar approach examining the specific circumstances of intrusion upon seclusion. For example, the Jones case was deemed a “mid-range” case based on the nature of the wrongful act, the relationship between the parties, and the distress, annoyance and embarrassment suffered by Jones arising from the wrong. The difficulty attaching value to injury that is not personal or financial is not significant enough that individuals should not be able to sue the individual responsible for their…

    • 534 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Long Island Railroad). Negligence is the legal term given to actions that breach the duty of care that one owes another according to the law. The court considered that the defendant did not owe a duty of care to Helen Palsgraf, and therefore no negligence was committed. The court found that the risk of the harm was unforeseeable. According to The Legal and Ethical Environment of Business, “If the risk of harm is foreseeable, then the duty exists” (2014, pg.224). The court found that the actions which occurred were not only unforeseeable in to the objective observer, but also to Helen Palsgraf. This is to say that the risk was unforeseeable to an objective or reasonably subjective person in her position. The court found that the proximity of the plaintiff to the cause of action was irrelevant. Long Island Railroad actions or inactions caused no negligence to Helen Palsgraf. Even if there was negligence toward someone else, this is not a basis for a claim by Helen…

    • 893 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Contracts I Course Outline

    • 2280 Words
    • 10 Pages

    b. Hawkins v. McGee – an expectation to the idea that most medical promises should be argued in malpractice suit…

    • 2280 Words
    • 10 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Texas Transportation Code

    • 3118 Words
    • 13 Pages

    1. In 200 to 300 words provide in your own words example of the terms ‘ negligence,” “mens rea,”…

    • 3118 Words
    • 13 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    While writing this paper, several articles stuck out, such as the one used above from EMS World, but how David Givot describes negligence, the consequences thereof, and how to prevent it was easy to grasp and very beneficial. He breaks down each individual part and expands on it.…

    • 238 Words
    • 1 Page
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Better Essays

    Torts Outline

    • 1819 Words
    • 8 Pages

    ▪ Must act intending to cause a harmful or offensive contact and when a harmful or offensive contact results. Snyder v. Turk (the surgeon yells at a nurse and pulls her face near a surgical opening) and Cohen v. Smith (against the pregnant woman’s religion to be touched or seen naked by the male nurse)(supports tort objective of protecting personal integrity)…

    • 1819 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Medical Malpractice

    • 5400 Words
    • 22 Pages

    The outcomes of medical malpractice lie in the following explanation of perspectives, referred to as “the good, the bad, and the ugly.” This paper provides a presentation of facts of the two highest single-incident medical malpractice lawsuits in Connecticut: Daniel Jacob D’Attilo et al. v. Richard Viscarello et al. (Case 1) and Elizabeth Oram and Simon Oram as Parents and Next Friends of Spencer Oram at al. v. Corinne E. De Cholnoky, M.D. et al. (Case 2) A brief summary of each case, entitled “Sum it Up” will precede the presentation of facts to give the basic premise and overview of events leading up to each trial. Both cases resulted in significant economic compensation to the plaintiff for damages of negligent infliction of emotional distress. After a description of each case, an analysis of the legal and ethical issues will be presented. This analysis will compare and contrast the view in three sections, entitled “the good, the bad, and the ugly” the patient (or plaintiff), doctor (or defendant), and lawyers. While the “good” and “bad” are clear, the “ugly” will specifically target the categorical imperative of the patient, doctor, and lawyers in these two lawsuits. After the positive and negative effects of these cases are revealed, several solutions will be identified with the hope of decreasing frivolous lawsuits, health care costs, and excessive medical bills.…

    • 5400 Words
    • 22 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    This essay will discuss the requisite elements for establishing negligent misstatement and the issue of liability to third parties. This area of business law is supported by a number of cases, which have established…

    • 2019 Words
    • 9 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    The respondent’s arguments on appeal were that the trial judge correctly found that it had not breached its duty of care, and if it had breached that duty, the appellant was 100% liable for contributory negligence. This argument gave rise to the second issue: if the respondent breached its duty of care, is the appellant guilty of contributory negligence, and to what extent?…

    • 2294 Words
    • 10 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .…

    • 15134 Words
    • 61 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Literacy

    • 767 Words
    • 4 Pages

    Anderson, James M., Je§rey R. Kling, and Kate Stith, ìMeasuring Interjudge Sentencing Disparity: Before and after the Federal Sentencing Guidelines,îJournal…

    • 767 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    Ssrn Id998565 1

    • 11199 Words
    • 42 Pages

    develop some of the ideas in this essay in significantly more depth in my forthcoming…

    • 11199 Words
    • 42 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    Law of Torts

    • 6761 Words
    • 28 Pages

    The project entitled “Consumer, Medical Profession and Negligence: Analysis“ submitted to the Symbiosis Law School, NOIDA for Law of Torts, MV Accident and Consumer Protection Laws-II as part of Internal assessment is based on my original work carried out under the guidance of Dr.Chandrashekhar J. Rawandale from December to February. The research work has not been submitted elsewhere for award of any degree. The material borrowed from other sources and incorporated in the thesis has been duly acknowledged. I understand that I myself could be held responsible and accountable for plagiarism, if any, detected later on.…

    • 6761 Words
    • 28 Pages
    Better Essays

Related Topics