SIMULATION Mary Grace C. Viray LAW/531 May 25‚ 2013 Professor Gregory Martin In analyzing the tort violation that Alumina‚ Inc may have possibly violated‚ they may be looking at negligence tort. There was definitely a breach of duty but still needs to prove that there is a proximate legal cause of injury from the result of environmental non-compliance of Alumina to be considered a case of negligence. After the violation‚ the company should have developed Enterprise Risk Management Procedures to
Premium Law Tort Tort law
Assignment 3 Eric Parsons September 8‚ 2013 It is important to differentiate between crimes‚ civil offenses‚ and moral wrongs to understand criminal law. This paper will discuss the differences between criminal‚ tort‚ and moral responsibility. There is a responsibility to the public not to commit acts or omissions against the public interest. A crime can be defined as an act or omission that the law makes punishable‚ generally by fine‚ penalty‚ forfeiture‚ or confinement
Premium Law Criminal law Sociology
section 218 of the Criminal Code should be based on objective fault and penal negligence rather than subjective fault. Penal Negligence requires that the Crown prove two aspects‚ the fact that a reasonable person would have identified the risks their behaviour imposed on a child. The second aspect is that the accused acted on marked departure from what a reasonable person’s behaviour would be in that circumstance. Penal Negligence is the fault requirement needed for section 215 of the Criminal Code‚ which
Premium Criminal law Appeal Supreme Court of the United States
This problem concerns clinical negligence by omission for failing to diagnose Jane for meningitis and encephalitis. For the hospital to be held vicariously liable for the actions of its doctors‚ Jane must prove misdiagnosis was carried out negligently and directly caused the injury. Lord Bingham said‚ ‘For the purposes of analysis‚ and for the purpose of pleading‚ proving and resolving the claim‚ lawyers find it convenient to break the claim into its constituent elements: the duty‚ the breach‚ the
Premium Law Tort law Tort
Business law case Brown is a farmer who‚ amongst other activities‚ has been in the business of raising chickens on large scale. The baby chicks require a continuous supply of a oxygen to survive and the necessary equipment for that purpose is connected to the electric power supplies to the farm. In thee past brown had suffered a minor loss of chickens from an interruption in this electric service and had‚ as a result‚ installed an auxiliary battery operated power generator in the barn to be available
Premium Electromagnetism Electricity Electricity generation
Contracts‚ Torts and Product Liability Name Institution Chapters 6 and 7 of John McAdams book are on contracts‚ business torts‚ and product liability respectively. In order to understand these chapters fully‚ I will provide an appropriate case and the court’s ruling due to the influence of factors discussed in these two chapters. Before I discuss this case‚ an introduction on the keywords in these chapters in relation to business law is necessary. A contract is a binding legal
Premium Contract Tort
Tort of Negligence case study The law of contract: a contract is a legally binding agreement‚ its a promise between two or more to parties with certain things‚each party must fulfill there promises if one of them don’t fulfill there promise then the contract is breached (VOID). The law of tort: A tort is a civil wrong in the sens that is committed against an individual‚ tort is compensated by a sum of money called “DAMAGES”. Contract laws and tort laws share many similarities. At
Premium Tort Contract Common law
plaintiffs often involve them having to prove many aspects of negligence and product liability – primarily duty of care‚ actual and proximate cause‚ and proof that the defendant is directly at fault for the plaintiff’s injuries. Because the doctrine of strict liability likely applies in this case‚ Daniel Boone does not need to prove that Zoom breached a duty of care‚ only that his injuries were a result of Zoom’s actions or negligence. The dispute in Case D between Daniel Boone‚ the plaintiff‚ and
Premium Tort Law Negligence
Legal: The four elements that demonstrate negligence that can lead to a medical malpractice lawsuit includes the following four according to our course note book and our instructor Kristin J. Kjensurd. 1st Clinician owed a legal duty of care to patient‚ 2nd clinician violated the duty of care‚ 3rd Duty of care violation caused injury to patient and 4th Patient suffered harm requiring compensation. In the article I read‚ all four elements that demonstrated negligence were violated by the clinician Cammy
Premium Patient Nursing Health care
Spears contends that she is a victim of a medical malpractice and of Texas’ newly reformed tort laws. Texas lawmakers unanimously passed a tort reform package in 2003 which topped noneconomic damages that a plaintiff could receive in medical malpractice at $250‚000. That became the negligence standard for emergency care. It also required an expert witness to substantiate evidence of negligence before a trial. Tort reform advocates approve the law as a way to reduce frivolous lawsuits against health care
Premium Medicine Health care Physician