Tort Liability and Contract Liability A tort is a legal term for "a wrong." The "tort law" is composed of state statutes and court decisions that gives one the right to sue someone who causes harm to them‚ whether it’s a drunk driver‚ a corporation that manufactures a defective product‚ a credit card company that overcharges you‚ or a government bureaucrat that breaks the law or a school official such as a teacher or principal. The law of the state in which the school is located determines a school’s
Premium Tort Contract Law
MICHAEL E. KLEIBER v HONDA OF AMERICA MFG.‚ INC.‚ Plaintiff-Appellant‚ Defendant-Appellee. FRL 302 – Professor Young Group Project INTRODUCTION This appellate case is about a man‚ Michael Kleiber who suffered a debilitating head injury that ultimately lead to his job termination as a factory worker for Honda. Honda claimed that they were unable to accommodate Kleiber’s disability on the basis that Kleiber was not able to perform the job tasks for any alternate job positions. Honda
Premium Fine motor skill Hand Motor control
Blake v. Barnard 1840 A man put his gun at the head of another and said‚ ’Be quiet or I blow your brain out’. No assault. If the person did what he is told nothing would happen. Contrast: READ v. CROKER (1853). Byrne (Canada) 1968 Canada Supreme Court A man went into a bank. Having a jacket over his hand‚ he said: I have a gun‚ give me the money or I shoot. No assault. He did not show the gun. Persuasive precedent. Janvier v. Sweeny 1919 Court of Appeal Private detectives tried
Premium Tort Tort law
LAW Torts 1 – Negligence: elements of liability Objectives The law of tort has already been mentioned in other topics in a comparative sense. After studying this topic you should be able to: • discuss the nature of tort law; • explain the various interests protected by tort law; • describe the three essentials of the tort of negligence; • apply the test of reasonable foreseeability in relation to the duty of care; • explain the circumstances in which a duty of
Premium Tort Tort law Duty of care
Case Analysis: Students are obliged to pre-prepare a two-page outline of their answers to the stated cases/problems in the given tutorial. The faculty will ask individual students to deliver an oral summary of their outline answer to the tutorial problems. These answers‚ written and oral‚ will form the basis of the tutorial proceedings. Here is a “rough guide” to the seven headings under which any case should be analyzed: 1. Case History = what was the legal basis of the claimant’s claim? When
Premium Law Supreme Court of the United States Logic
coincidentally was passing by. In this case‚ Tim can definitely claim against Danny as Danny has surely commit a tortuous action towards Tim. Tort is a French word for wrong and tort has three categories namely intentional torts‚ unintentional torts (negligence)‚ and strict liability (Cheeseman‚ 2010). This case is specifically classified as unintentional tort or negligence. The victim could claim damages sought from the offending party (Cheeseman‚ 2010). Since Tim was injured‚ he could bring a civil
Premium Tort Negligence Tort law
[G.R. No. 117103. January 21‚ 1999] Spouses RENATO S. ONG and FRANCIA N. ONG‚ Petitioners‚ v. COURT OF APPEALS‚ INLAND TRAILWAYS‚ INC. and PHILTRANCO SERVICE ENTERPRISE‚ INC.‚Respondents. FACTS: Petitioners were paying passengers of Inland Bus (owned and operated by Inland Trailways under a Lease Agreement with Philtranco)‚ iIt was driven by Calvin Coronel. Around 3:50 a.m. on February 9‚ 1987‚ when the Inland bus slowed down to avoid a stalled cargo truck in Tiaong‚ Quezon‚ it was bumped from
Premium Appeal Law Jury
TORTS FINAL EXAM OUTLINE INTENTIONAL TORTS 3 2. Battery 3 3. Assault 3 4. Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress 3 5. False Imprisonment 4 6. Trespass 4 6.1. Trespass to Land 4 6.2. Trespass to Chattels 4 6.3. Conversion 4 AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES 5 7. Consent (Privilege) 5 8. Self Defense (Privilege) 5 8.1. Self-Defense by Force Not Threatening Death or Serious Bodily Harm 5 8.2. Self-Defense by Force Threatening Death or Serious Bodily Harm
Premium Tort Common law Law
PA-310 Unit 1 Causes of Action Tort laws are laws that offer remedies to individuals harmed by the unreasonable actions of others. Tort claims usually involve state law and are based on the legal premise that individuals are liable for the consequences of their conduct if it results in injury to others. Tort law only requires 4 elements to be shown. The first one is that the tortfeasor owes the injured party a duty to do something or not to do something; two is that tortfeasor breached the
Premium Tort
The issue is whether the defendant Sykt Jebat can be held liable for the damages suffered by the plaintiffs‚ Sam‚ Jojo and Lan under the law of Occupiers’ Liability. Occupiers’ liability concerns injury caused to a plaintiff as a result of defective condition of the land‚ building and premises. In order to establish occupiers’ liability‚ the occupier must have a sufficient degree of control over the premise. Lord Denning in Wheat v Lacon & Co Ltd (1966) held that “whenever a person has a sufficient
Premium Tort law Standard of care Duty of care