Sign Up Now
Get instant access to over 1 million+ study documents
OR
Already registered? click here to login
By creating your account, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and student honor code.
¶ … IRAC approach to legal issue, the first stage in assessing any case is the identification of the issues, before the identification of rules and their application which are used to reach a conclusion. This paper identifies five of the issues in four cases. It is possible there may be more than five in each case. Issues are usually phrased as questions.
Case A Did Glen owe Miguel and Jack a duty of care, if so did he breach that duty?
Was the mental distress and subsequent hospitalization of Jacki a direct result of Glen's actions?
Did the police owe Miguel and Jacki a duty of care, and was that breached by releasing Glen only an hour after he had been cited for drinking under the influence (could they has reasonability foreseen what might occur)
When Miguel spoke to Stacy, did he intend to inflict emotional harm by inaccurately referring to him as a 'drunken murderer', and did this cause any injury? Also, did Stavy have a duty of care to Glen to make sure her published story was true, and was there any injury as a direct result of the sotry?
5. Did Jacki's neighbor have a duty of care towards Glen specifically to keep his dog under control, and was that breached when the dog...
Was Leiserv, doing business as Mockingbird Lanes, negligent in failing to clear the ice from the lane, or warn customers of the danger of ice?
2. Does the statement of Frank Jameson, general manager of Mockingbird
Lanes indicate an acceptance of liability?
3. Was the injury to Dukat a direct result of her falling on the ice, or was Dukat also partially responsible, as he had been drinking, and had already noticed the icy state of the lane. If she was partly to blame, to what extent did she contribute to her own injury? In addition, given that this is Nebraska, and where
4. Can the value of the injury be realistically quantified at $155,000 and proven by Dukat?
5. Has the claim been brought to court within a suitable time frame
Case C
1. Should the warrant have issued for the search Donald's apartment and arrest based on sufficient probable cause, based on an only in an anonymous informant.
2. Should the word of an informant be sufficient for the issue of a warrant if there is no information provided regarding the character and reliability of the informant?
3. Was evidence…
references, if so, is the university committing liable by giving inaccurate information? Has this caused injury?
4. Have the university committed slander by telling the private investigator that Professor Tickle "lazy," "drank too much" and implying she may be having a nervous breakdown, looking at each claim individually? Has this caused injury?
5. Does the employees' neighbor have a duty of care to Professor Tickle, and are they in breach when their dog bites Professor Tickle?
Negligence Torts, Duty of Care and Available Remedies People commit torts all the time, intentionally and unintentionally, and many of these are dismissed, excused, ignored or otherwise allowed to transpire without resorting to litigation for remedies. For instance, if someone's foot is stepped on a couple of times in a crowded elevator, it may be a tort but it also may not be a big deal. In some cases, though, the
Sanders's injury was more as a result of the "hard falls" of softball, rather than any sort of "rough treatment" that occurred as a result of improper supervision. The "rough treatment" category of head-butting football players can easily be distinguished from the more passive interaction between sliding ankle and first base. When the facts of a case clearly demonstrate improper supervision of "rough treatment" athletic activity, the courts have had
torts that have been developed in order foster the understanding of various civil wrongs when one is engaging in a business practice. These include the intentional, strict liability, and negligence torts. The torts have been classified according to the contextual framework by which they were committed. The following definitions have been widely accepted to define the different types of torts in business law. An intentional Tort An intentional tort is a
Tort of Negligence with regards to business law. The discussions will particularly focus on areas that affect business decisions and any underlying law principles that have any effect on the same. There is also a section that looks at some of the sources of distrust of law. Negligence primarily means an action that creates an unreasonable risk, or in other words the failure of an individual to act normatively, as
Case Analysis: Jones v. StateIntroductionThis paper discusses the case of Jones v. State, in which Kimberly Jones sued the State of Maryland for negligent training of two deputies who allegedly used excessive force during an altercation while attempting to serve an arrest warrant. The case ultimately hinged on the question of whether the State breached its duty to Jones in connection with the tort of negligent training and supervision.Negligence Tort
Liability On December 3, 1984; the lives of residents of Bhopal, India were changed dramatically. This occurred with the release of 40 tons of Methyl Isocyanate Gas (MIC) leaked from the Union Carbide plant. The result is that more than 3,800 people died from the release of this substance into the atmosphere. The lasting effects are that local and national regulations were streamlined under the Bhopal Gas Leak Disaster Act. The