Negligence Torts, Duty of Care and Available emedies
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 level of the tort rises to an actionable offense, requiring courts of competent jurisdiction to decide the issues that are involved in order to determine if a civil wrong or injury has been committed and if so, what remedies are available to help make the victim of the tort whole. To gain some new insights into these issues, this paper provides a review of the relevant literature to identify the basic elements of a negligence tort, an analysis of duty….

Negligence of Auditors
Policy Considerations

In the past one decade, there have been rampant cases against auditors, reflecting both on the litigious nature of a plaintiff's bar, which encourages claims against independent certified public accountants

Owing to this, there have been numerous literatures encouraging the imposition of civil liability on accountants whose actions fail to conform to professional standards. Therefore, many courts after considering the scope of an auditor's vulnerability to negligence have sought to provide some policy considerations in an attempt to protect the auditors.

Some courts have analogized the law of products liability to adopt a predictable standard, which will help them measure an accountant's liability for negligence

. In addition, another important principle, which many courts consider is the cost-benefit limitation because it works differently when compared to the financial audit. Nevertheless, prior to determining a case of negligence, the court can now measure the potential profit of the accounting firm against….

Negligence and espondeat Superior: Should Employers be Held esponsible for Employee Negligence?
Negligence

"A person has acted negligently if he or she has departed from the conduct expected of a reasonably prudent person acting under similar circumstances" (West, 2008). To establish a claim of negligence, a plaintiff has to establish four elements: duty of care, breach of duty, factual causation, and damages (Berry, Sahradnik, Kotzas, & Benson, 2013). The duty of care element means that, even if a person failed to act with reasonable care, he cannot be held liable in a negligence action unless he owed a duty to the plaintiff. However, a person is generally "under a duty to all persons at all times to exercise reasonable care for their physical safety and the safety of their property" (West, 2008). The breach of duty requires that the person fail to act as a reasonable person would have in that same….

Negligence
Generally, In order to sustain a cause of action for negligence, a plaintiff must establish that the defendant owed him a duty of care, that the defendant breached that duty of care by his negligent commission of an action (or by his negligent omission of action), and that the defendant's breach of that duty of care was the proximate cause of tangible harm to the plaintiff (Dobbs, 2001).

In addition, and depending on the particular statutes in the state where the events occurred, the plaintiff may also have to establish that his own negligence was less than that of the defendant in order to recover at all. In other states, the negligence of the plaintiff will not necessarily preclude his recovery, but any award may be reduced by whatever percentage he is deemed responsible for his damages by virtue of his own contributory negligence.

Classes of Harm and Persons:

In negligence causes of….

"Cause" is the next element needed for a successful negligence suit, but this is probably the most intricate element involved. The first aspect of "cause" is known as "cause in fact," and involves demonstrating that the defendant's actions, or lack of action, actually caused the harm suffered by the plaintiff. For example, the patient in the case actually suffered paralysis as a result of the surgery. It must be pointed out that the surgeon involved did not perform the surgery ineffectively but that the chance of paralysis was a possible outcome of a successful surgery. In other words, the negligence was not the surgeon's technique but the failure to inform the patient of the possible outcomes of even a successful surgery. This type of "cause" is known as "proximate cause," or the defendant's failure to foresee the harms that may result through their actions. In this case, the doctor failed….

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 no trouble imposing liability. In rooks v. oard of Education of City of New York [205 N.Y.S. 2nd 777 (1960)], the court found in favor of the plaintiff who was injured during a game of line soccer due to a physical mismatch between him and his opponent. The court stated that a physical mismatch in a "hazardous" game such as soccer should have been more closely supervised.

The essence of any legitimate legal system is the ability to predict rulings. Generally….

This being the case, the liability insurance company will pass the suit to their attorney, who will then be responsible for filling a written answer.
The next phase in the litigation process will be a series of discovery, where each side will be given the opportunity to research the case by asking each other questions and demanding specified documents. ased on this gathered information, the liability insurance company again will reevaluate the case, deciding whether it is a case that they should continue to defend or one they should attempt to settle outside of court.

As said before, because there is a legitimate question as to Gielle's employer's fault, the liability insurance company will most likely decide that it is in their best interest to continue to defend the case. Their next move will be to file a Motion for Summary Judgment, which as the court to dismiss Monty's action do….

Negligence
a) Elements of Negligence

Your son sustains a deep laceration on the leg, and you decide to bring him to the hospital for the doctor to perform the routine check-up and at the same time dress the wound. You stop the bleeding, disinfect, and gauze the wound before leaving the house. At the hospital, the doctor, in a rush, performs the regular check-up, and then embarks on addressing the wound. He does appear fazed and hastily makes an assumption that it would require no more than a few stitches. He takes tools from the top of the examination table, and uses them on your son's one-hour-old wound; not knowing that they had been used to treat a child with an infection. The hospital policy requires doctors to only use sterilized tools from designated drawers. A week later, your son's wound becomes discolored, and he gets increasingly unwell. You return to the….

Negligence Misstatements in the Law of Torts
This is a concept of contract law indicative of carelessly made facts by one party to another with the effect of luring that party into a contract. It could also be falsehood or false promises made by a trader while having no reasonable basis to believe it to be true, regarding the nature of products intended for sale are a classic example of negligence misstatement. It allows damages to the plaintiff where there is neither collateral contract nor fraud.[footnoteRef:1] [1: Witting, C. (2005). Liability for Negligent Misstatements. Oxford: Oxford University Press.]

Negligent misrepresentation was first seen in the case of Hedley yrne v Heller [1964] A.C 465.[footnoteRef:2] This case was centered on economic loss that resulted from a negligent misstatement. Hedley yrne in this case claimed that the information regarding Easipower Ltd., given to it by Heller and Partners Ltd., was given negligently and was….

The tort for companionship and society is, by law, only applicable to persons and not to animals, regardless of their regard as companion animals or not.
As for the trespass tort, it was found that insufficient evidence was available to prove wrongdoing by the plaintiffs. There was no evidence to suggest how the dogs entered the plaintiffs' property. Evidence of neglect was not sufficient, according to the court.

Analysis

I was somewhat surprised by the court's ruling, since at first sight the negligence was clearly on the part of the dog owners. Furthermore, the fact that the dogs had already killed another neighbor's rabbits should have emphasized the necessity of providing more secure premises for the animals. It could therefore be said that the dog owners had a duty to all their neighbors to keep their dogs securely within a limited environment, where they could not cause damage to the property of….

Negligence
FACTS:

Precise Engineering Corporation had a contract with Quik Mart Stores to provide customized software for Quik Mart Stores' inventory control system.

A Precise Engineering Corporation subcontractor is induced by a Quik Mart competitor, Retail Outlets, Inc.

The delivery of the inventory control system software is delayed one week.

Quik Mart Stores does sustain a $500,000 loss in profits.

The issue question at hand is: Can Quik Mart Stores sue Precise Engineering Corporation for negligence and Retail Outlets, Inc. For interfering with the delivery of the inventory control system, causing it to be one week late, that caused them to lose $500,000 in profits and can Precise Engineering Corporation sue Retail Outlets, Inc. For wrongful or tortious interference with the contract by inducing the subcontractor?

RULE OF LAW:

Negligence occurs when the defendant owes a duty to the plaintiff, a breach of that duty has occurred, the breach of the duty caused harm to occur, and the….

Negligence Tort Case eview
In 1981 Dula McCarty, while staying at the Pheasant un Lodge, was attacked in her room. The intruder had gained access to her room through a sliding glass door that was lock but had a small safety chain attached. While Mrs. McCarty was out for dinner the intruder, who was never caught, pried open the sliding door, cut through the small chain, entered the room and attacked her upon her return. Mrs. McCarty sued the hotel claiming negligence on their part but the jury found in favor of the hotel. In 1987 she appealed the verdict to the 7th Circuit Court which upheld the original court's ruling. (McCarty v. Pheasant un)

A tort can loosely be defined as an action by one person against another that results in harm to the second person, and in general there are three types of torts: intentional, negligence, and strict liability. While….

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 a rational person would. The standard that is used to determine if an individual is guilty of the offense of negligence is by asking ourselves whether a careful person would have done the same. In most cases it is often an issue of whether or not there was an act of negligence or conversely whether or not there was compliance or conformity of one's act to those of a reasonable man (Negligence-As a Matter of Law or a Question of….

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 and Establishing LiabilityNegligence is a legal theory that forms the basis for many personal injury cases, including the case you mentioned. A negligence tort occurs when someone\\\'s failure to exercise reasonable care causes harm to another person (Gless et al., 2016). To establish liability in a negligence case, the plaintiff must prove the elements of duty, breach, causation, and damages.The first element of negligence is duty. The defendant must have owed a duty of care to the plaintiff. This means….

Bauer Review
This report shall contain a review and analysis of the case State v. Bauer as it occurred and transpired in 2014. There will be a summary of the issues of the case, an account of the case, the thoughts of the author of this report when it comes to the case, whether there is a clear understanding of the decision, whether there is agreement when it comes to the decision and what the American public thinks of the system. The case centers on gun safety and whether (and to what extent) an owner of a gun could or should be held responsible when the gun involves being used in a crime of some sort, whether it be intentional or incidental or on accident. hile Bauer certainly is at least somewhat culpable for what happened, many feel an affirmative and intentional act is necessary to have him charged or convicted….

The Wirecard Scandal: A Case Study in Corporate Fraud

In June 2020, the German fintech company Wirecard filed for insolvency, revealing a massive accounting fraud scandal that shook the global financial community. As the dust settled, it became clear that the company's financial statements had been grossly inflated, and that executives had engaged in a sophisticated scheme to deceive investors and regulators.

The Scheme

Wirecard's fraudulent scheme involved several interconnected elements. Firstly, the company created fake subsidiaries in Southeast Asia to inflate its revenue and profits. These subsidiaries had no real operations but were used to process fictitious transactions. Secondly, Wirecard used third-party....

Harnessing Scientific Advancements to Combat Misconceptions and Foster Understanding of Cerebral Palsy

Cerebral palsy (CP), a group of neurological disorders affecting movement and posture, is often shrouded in misconceptions that hinder societal understanding and inclusivity. Advancements in scientific research can be harnessed as powerful tools to challenge these misconceptions and educate the public, fostering a more informed and compassionate society.

Breaking Down Misconceptions

Misconception 1: CP is solely a physical disability affecting mobility.

Scientific Evidence: Research reveals that CP can also manifest in cognitive, sensory, and communication impairments. By studying the underlying brain abnormalities, scientists have expanded our understanding of CP's multifaceted nature.

Misconception 2:....

The documentary Blackfish examines the treatment of orcas in captivity, particularly focusing on the case of Tilikum, a captive orca responsible for the deaths of several people. The film challenges ethical principles surrounding animal rights in the entertainment industry by highlighting the detrimental consequences of keeping these highly intelligent and social creatures in captivity for the purpose of entertainment.

One of the key ethical issues raised in the documentary is the exploitation of animals for profit. The film shows how orcas kept in captivity are forced to perform tricks and shows for the amusement of audiences, often in conditions that are....