WIRETIME has committed a tort. WIRETIME took out an ad that was designed to hurt BUGusa’s reputation. This constitutes defamation, because the defamation was written it is libel. For BUGusa to recover from WIRETIME, it will have to meet four elements. The first is to prove that the statements in the ad were false. The second to show that the defamation was distributed to a third party (this has been met as the ad was published in a well-known industry magazine). The third element is specificity, or that the statement was specifically about BUGusa. The last element BUGusa must show is that it suffered damages as a result of the ad. If all four elements cannot be shown, BUGusa cannot recover from WIRETIME.…
A Tort was committed by WIRETIME, Inc. which means “a civil wrong where on party has acted, or in some cases failed to act, and that action or inaction causes a loss to be suffered by another party” (Melvin, S.P., 2011) The statement made by WIRETIME, Inc. will potentially harm Bugusa, Inc. reputation. A statement made by WIRETIME, Inc. accusing Bugusa, Inc. products were low quality and did not work past a months’ time. This type of statement is a defamatory “A false and defamatory…
1) The defamatory statement must be “clear and specific” to the company or product. WIRETIME clearly stated in the ad that the equipment used by BUGusa, Inc. was “low quality and did not work reliably for more than 1 month,” (University of Phoenix, 2013). The statement was made against a specific company and their specific product.…
For any company that communicates by computer, the proposal: 1) Creates liability for, but never defines, "indecent" speech, a dangerously vague standard that could leave companies criminally liable for use of mere profanity; 2) Establishes vague and contradictory standards of liability that could leave innocent companies vicariously liable for communications over which they have no control; 3) Strips workable affirmative…
Clear and specific reference to the disparaged product. WIRETIME makes defamatory statements about a specific company [BUGusa (BUG)] as well as to the specific product that BUG manufactures (BUG’s electronic recording devices).…
It seems WIRETIME, Inc. (a relatively new competitor) committed intentional tort advertising negative information in a well-known industry magazine in regard to BUGusa, Inc.’s devices being low quality and stating the devices works for one month only. An intentional tort occurs when a party intentionally caused another party to suffer injury or damage (Larson, 2005). In this particular scenario, WIRETIME, Inc. posting an advertisement as such participated in a libel act. A libel act involves making defamatory statements in a fixed medium, such as a magazine or newspaper (Larson, 2005). Defamation is considered as an act of harming the reputation of a person or company by making false statements to another person or company (Larson, 2005).…
ASSAULT, BATTERY AND FALSE IMPRISONMENT ARE EXAMPLES OF ____ TORTS THAT INVOLVE INTERFERENCE WITH A PERSON'S BODY.…
5. Survival action: an action the decedent had before his death that is brought by his executor/administrator on behalf of the estate…
In the case at Gigantic State University, students that were a part of the SFT committed several careless acts. Within this particular case there was a definite crime that was committed because both Prudence’s physical and mental integrity was harmed. Not only could this case be classified according to the textbook as an intentional tort against persons but could be put into intentional tort against property. Torts against persons are intentional acts that harm an individual’s physical or mental integrity (Kubasek, pg. 111). A person who is legally injured may be able to use tort law to recover damages from someone who is legally responsible, or “liable,” for those injuries. According to the case, Prudence’s physical integrity was harmed…
WIRETIME, Inc. places an ad in a magazine stating that BUGusa devices were low quality and did not work for more than a month. The tort is defamation. Defamation occurs when one party makes a false statement about another. A third party heard or read the statement must be about a particular party, and damages such as loss of business result of the statement. WIRETIME stated a false statement about the product only lasting a month and that they were low quality in order to make their product more desirable. It is libel defamation since it was in written in a magazine. It is specific since is targets BUGusa, Inc. product, and there is damages for loss of revenue from the statement.…
• In order to determine if a child is behaving negligently, a child must conform to what a reasonable person of like, age, intelligence, and experience under like circumstances.…
Defendant’s actions were the proximate cause (nearest cause/ number of factors that collectively caused the Plaintiff’s injuries) or actual cause (specific factor that caused the Plaintiff’s injuries) of the harm to Plaintiff…
Exam Analysis Chart out all of the torts that are in the fact pattern. Who are the plaintiffs and defendants? Make the prima facie case. Raise the defenses to the prima facie case. General considerations, if any. Vicarious liability Joint tortfeasors Intentional Torts – Attacking the fact pattern Always treat the plaintiff as an average person (no super sensitivities except when D is aware of them.) Everyone is liable for an intentional tort!…
In this case it is considered defense of persons in which is a legal justification for assault, battery and false imprisonment. Assault is someone that intentionally puts another in fear and battery is when someone using force against another person. False imprisonment is someone that is holding another person down against their will. The reason it is considered defense of persons because Leroy was using reasonable force by protecting Jane the third person from injury where John threatened by an attacking force.…
“During the 19th and 20th centuries, individuals who broke the law were seen as the creation of social disorders, therefore punishment was considered to be justified only as of the following (1) it protected society by acting as a deterrent or by temporarily or permanently removing one who has injured it or (2) it aimed at the moral or social regeneration of the criminal.” (Bernard, 2014)…