Republic of the Philippines SUPREME COURT Manila EN BANC G.R. No. L-30642 April 30‚ 1985 PERFECTO S. FLORESCA‚ in his own behalf and on behalf of the minors ROMULO and NESTOR S. FLORESCA; and ERLINDA FLORESCA-GABUYO‚ PEDRO S. FLORESCA‚ JR.‚ CELSO S. FLORESCA‚ MELBA S. FLORESCA‚ JUDITH S. FLORESCA and CARMEN S. FLORESCA; LYDIA CARAMAT VDA. DE MARTINEZ in her own behalf and on behalf of her minor children LINDA‚ ROMEO‚ ANTONIO JEAN and ELY‚ all surnamed Martinez; and DANIEL MARTINEZ and TOMAS
Premium Tort Supreme Court of the United States Law
is a two-stage test of establishing legal proximity and considering public policies‚ following the fulfilment of the threshold of factual foreseeability. The Spandeck test is said to be universal and applicable to all types of harm resulting from negligence. Claims for physical injury‚ psychiatric injury and pure economic losses have been successfully addressed with the Spandeck test. Similarly‚ cases concerning occupier’s liability can be addressed by applying the Spandeck test too to determine whether
Premium Law Tort Common law
Week 7 Breach of the Duty of Care Negligence Duty of care Established or novel duty? Is it a non-delegable duty? What is the scope of the duty? Breach of duty What is the relevant standard of care? Has the standard been breached? Damage Is it recognized by law? Was the breach a necessary condition of the harm? Is the harm within the scope of the defendant’s liability? Breach of Duty The fault part of the negligence action An act or omission of the defendant A failure to act as a reasonable person
Premium Tort law Reasonable person Negligence
NEGLIGENCE I: The legal issue here is whether Defendant is negligent towards Plaintiff R: To prove negligence‚ P must prove 3 elements: (1) duty of care; (2) breach of duty of care; (3) causation &remoteness. I. DUTY OF CARE I: Prove physical injury/ not (Neither his body nor Properties were damaged) - Therefore‚ the legal issue is whether D owed P a DOC for... II. BREACH OF the DUTY OF CARE: I: The legal issue is whether D failed to meet the standard of care to P R: A D has breached
Premium Tort law Tort Law
liability or negligence‚ which allows a person injured by an unreasonably dangerous product to recover damages from the manufacturer or seller of the product even in the absence of a contract or negligent conduct on the part of the manufacturer or seller (Bagley‚ 2013). Therefore‚ Wood should recover damages even if the seller exercised all possible care in the manufacture and sale of the product‚ because the defect in the product is the basis for liability (Bagley‚ 2013). Negligence claims could
Free Product liability Tort Negligence
contributory negligence. Duplechin also contends that the trial court erred in negligent. Allstate further contends that the coverage under its policy which excludes injury intended or expected by the insured. Issue: 1. Whether the plaintiff was guilty of contributory negligence and assume the risk of particular accident? 2. Whether the defendant Allstate coverage was excluded under the terms of its policy or not? 3. Whether the Duplechin’s action was intended tort or negligence? Holding:
Premium Tort Common law Tort law
causation scope of liability Defences: Contributory negligence Remedies: Compensatory damages Consequential damage Lost opportunity Fraudulent misrepresentation (deceit) = A false representation made by one‚ who either has knowledge of its falsity‚ or is reckless as to its truth‚ with the intention that the Pl should act on it‚ and which causes damage as a result = A separate tort (and not a negligence action) Representation of Fact Oral‚ written‚ conduct‚ intention
Premium Tort Negligence Tort law
journalistic articles on the hit series MTV’s The Real World. Both articles took different approaches when critically looking at the television show. The amount of evidence that was offered in the academic essay was significantly bigger than what was offered in the journalistic essay. The academic essay I looked at came directly from our textbook‚ it was “Constructions of Reality on MTV’s The Real World: An Analysis of the Restrictive Coding of Black Masculinity” by Mark P. Orbe. This article made claims
Free Essay Writing Audience theory
124 Nev. 213‚ 180 P.3d 1172(2008) PROCEDURAL HISTORY The case begin when Mrs. Turner filed a complaint in district court against the Las Vegas 51s‚ alleging negligence and Mr. Turner complaint for loss of consortium‚ and negligent infliction of emotional distress (NIED). The district court concluded that Mrs. Turner’s negligence claim failed because the Las Vegas 51s did not owe a duty to protect her from the foul ball in question. Also‚ Mr. Turner’s claim for loss of consortium and NIED failed
Premium Negligence Tort law Law
Assumption of Risk PARA 200 Assumption of Risk Assumption of risk provides a defense to a claim of negligence in cases where the plaintiff knowingly exposes himself or herself to danger and assumes responsibility for any harm. It is based on the premises that an individual is responsible for the consequences of choice (Tort Law for Paralegals‚ 2010). What is usually meant by assumption of risk is more precisely termed primary assumption of risk. It occurs when the plaintiff has either expressly
Premium Tort Tort law Common law