A similar case would be Timmerman v Modern Industries, INC. 960 F.2d 692; 1992 U.S. App. LEXIS 6205. This case involved a collision between a truck (Defendant, Modern Industries) and a person (Timmerman). Timmerman died due to his injuries resulting from the accident. The decedent’s mother brought a wrongful death suit against Modern Industries. Timmerman was found to be 51% at fault thus the claim against Modern Industries was denied. Timmerman’s actions before he collided with Modern Industries are what led to the accident in the first place. An example of one of Timmerman’s contribution to the accident is:…
Rules: The case was adjudicated on the basis of negligence law. Negligence is “the omission to do something which a reasonable man would do, or doing something which a prudent and reasonable man would not do.” Among others, negligence law takes into consideration: duty of care, breach of duty of care, injuries caused by defendant’s negligent act(s), and the likes. (Cheeseman, 2013). A particular negligence law considered during this case was negligence per se.…
Issue: Should Arnold and Sylvia Barfknecht have been convicted of a negligent tort against Betty Pichelman?…
In Haugen v. Ford Motor Co., the requirement of Article 2-302(2) that the court required an affording opportunity for the buyer to present evidence to aid the court in making a determination. In this case, Plaintiff buyer challenged the judgment of the District Court of Williams County (North Dakota) that granted summary judg-ment in favor of defendant manufacturer dismissing the buyer's damage claim based on a liability exclusion for damage from fire. The buyer filed a complaint against the man-ufacturer when the car he bought burst into flames while he drove it. The manufacturer was awarded summary judgment dismissing the buyer's claim based on a liability ex-clusion for damage from fire included in the limitation of liability. The court…
The Supreme Court’s ruling does not bar any resident from New Jersey or any other state, from bringing a suit against the tobacco companies. It shows that there were specifically enacted laws set-forth by congress that addresses the tobacco companies and how they can market and label the product. Based on this case, any person has the right to legally go after a tobacco company. This…
Regarded as the first major juvenile rights case to preface further juvenile court reforms, Kent v. United States established the universal precedents of requiring waiver hearings before juveniles could be transferred to the jurisdiction of a criminal court and juveniles being entitled to consult with counsel prior to and during such hearings.…
In 1961, while on probation from an earlier case, Morris Kent, age 16, was charged with rape and robbery. Kent confessed to the offense as well as to several similar incidents. Assuming that the District of Columbia juvenile court would consider waiving jurisdiction to the adult system, Kent's attorney filed a motion requesting a hearing on the issue of jurisdiction.…
2. In part of the case not included here, the court notes that Mr. Woolley died “before oral arguments on this case.” How can there be any damages if the plaintiff has died? Who now has any case to pursue?…
Legal fame may arise from great accomplishments, while other names become known for the issues for which they stand upon, like Rosa Parks, Roe and Miranda. For my first paper, the event that I felt influenced and changed the foundation and helped structure the American Legal History was the famous 1928 civil case Palsgraf V. Long Island Railroad Co. (248 N.Y. 339; 162 N.E. 99; Courts of Appeals New York (1928) The unique facts of the case created a need for a new application of the generally accepted theory that “negligence is the absence of care, according to the circumstances of the case”. (Benjamin Cardozo, 1928 N.Y. Lexis 1269; 59 A.L.R 1253). The famous accident occurred at the Queen’s Jamaica Station on the morning of Aug. 24, 1924. According to New York Times, 1924 Helen Palsgraf was standing on the platform waiting for a train just like the other passengers were, another passenger was running to catch a train that was departing. As the man jumped to catch the train, employees’ from the LIRR were trying to help him, when the package he was carrying fell to the rails. As a result of helping the man, the package exploded causing scales to fall on and injure passengers waiting for their train. The package which contained fireworks caused an explosion in which Mrs. Palsgraf and many others were injured, she later then sued the Long Island Railroad and won. The key point of the case that I felt changed the American Legal history was the opinions and different out looks each judge had toward the case. Later on these out looks would change history and the history of Tort Law. Judge Cardozo set a theory of duty and proximate causation that became the law of the state of New York, then eventually the law of the country. He wrote that the railroad was not liable, because the injury was unforeseeable.…
THE WORKS OF WILLIAMS VS SALINGER Often in literature, authors will imitate existent works. Whether intentionally or unintentionally, this is definitely the case when one discusses the works of Tennessee Williams and J.D. Salinger. However, the similarities are most evident in each authors' characters. One can say that Blanche Dubois from A Streetcar Named Desire parallels Holden Caulfield from Catcher in the Rye the most because both characters believe in falsehoods and lie throughout the two books, both use a material element to hide from the world and escape into these falsehoods, and each suffer mental breakdowns at the end of the book when they are forced to realize the truth.…
“In any case in which death was involved, the law where the act or omission complained of occurred provides, or has been construed to provide, for damages only punitive in nature, the United States shall be liable for actual or compensatory damages, measured by the pecuniary injuries resulting from such death to the persons respectively, for whose benefit the action was brought, in lieu thereof (federal-tort-claims 2012).”…
All humans are guilty of forming unrealistic expectations and ideals of others. When people do not meet these preconceived lists of ideals they are often judged or shooed away. Therefore in order to protect their own pride people often shield themselves from or try to change those who are different, instead of appreciating and accepting them. This was shown in “The Scarlet Ibis” by James Hurst, the narrator always dreamed of having a little brother. Finally, his dream came true and his mother had a second child. However, this child, nicknamed Doodle, was born deformed and with a serious heart condition. The entire family accepted Doodle, his disabilities and drastic limitations, except for the narrator. Throughout the next seven years, the…
Man, it's hot! Temperature that exceeds one hundred degrees Fahrenheit is the only thing one finds at the Mexico, U.S. border while waiting to cross it. Yes, the United States and Mexico share a border, but they have other similarities, such as the kind of government, similar shopping facilities and wonderful vacationing locations. Differences also come into play when one has two different countries; these differences are people and government, which lead to other differences.…
Fitzerald, Patrick, Krueger, Kurt V. (2005, Nov 19). Tort Remedy in the Law Versus Economic Restitution for Personal Injury and Wrongful Death. South Economic Association 75th Annual Meeting, Retrieved June 2006, from http://johnwardeconomics.com/Research%20and%20Data/Tort%20Remedy%20v%20Economic%20Restitution.pdf…
The lawsuit ended with Stella Liebeck’s injuries meriting an award of $200,000 compensatory damages; however that award was reduced proportionately to $160,000. The jury also awarded Ms. Liebeck $2.7 million in punitive damages, but because it was allegedly a fraudulent lawsuit, it was reduced by the trial court to $480,000 and stated that McDonald’s engaged in “willful, reckless, malicious, or wanton conduct”. Although this was a reasonable lawsuit, it was occurring when tort reform was gaining speed in the public eye, and was used in different means in the communities to help grow the idea of frivolous lawsuits.…