Tort Law

Kansas Tort Law

admin — Sat, 15 Nov 2008 14:28:04 +0000

MORE ON DAMAGES
Pecuniary: monetary damages which can be quantified/ can be special or general
General heads of Damages include:
1. physical injury itself, including pain and suffering at the time of trial
2. disability and loss of amenities before trial
3. loss of earning before trial
4. expenses incurred before trial
5. pain and suffering expected to be suffered after trial
6. loss of amenities after trial
7. loss of life expectancy
8. loss of earnings to be suffered after the … [visit site to read more]

Colorado Tort Law

admin — Wed, 15 Oct 2008 14:26:57 +0000

THE USE OF STATUTES IN COMMON LAW NEGLIGENCE
R v Saskatchewan Wheat Pool (1983 SCC)- grain supplied to SWP was infested w/ rusty beetle making grain unmarketable, and casuing substanital losses to farmers who attemptes to sue SWP for neg’ce - the statute included regulatory provisions for the quality of grain, imposing fines for contamination, but was silent about civil liablty-could a tort in neg;ce be implied?-
England- recognises tort of statutory breach if the following can be shown: … [visit site to read more]

Australian Tort Law Terms

admin — Tue, 30 Sep 2008 14:25:47 +0000

3. Res Ipsa Loquitur “the thing that speaks for itself”
a) WHEN DOES RES IPSA LOQUITUR APPLY?
- a rule pertaining to circumstatnial evidence, from whcih an inference of neg;ce can arise (takes you to the point of evidentiary burden)
- b/c it is based on circumstantial evidence, it cannot apply when there are multiple tortfeasors
criteria for application of rule:
1. D must have sole (or at least effective) control over the thing causing harm
2. occurance would not normally … [visit site to read more]

Maritime Tort Laws

admin — Mon, 15 Sep 2008 14:24:47 +0000

3. Participation in a Criminal or Immoral Act
“Ex Turpi Causa Non Oritur Actio”
- cannot recover for injury sustained while involved in an illegal action - cannot recover for ones own wrongdoing
- protection of the integrity of the legal system
onus: on defendant to establish illegal/immoral conduct on part of P

Hall v Hebert (1993 SCC)- P is attmepting to sue D for letting him drive while drunk
Cory: tries to abolish ex turpi saying 2nd branch of Anns test would negate duty (are … [visit site to read more]

Tort Law Self Defense Duty to Warn

admin — Sat, 30 Aug 2008 14:23:31 +0000

1. Contributory Negligence
a) CONDUCT CONSTITUTING THE DEFENCE

onus: on the defendant to prove that injured party did nto in his own interest take reasonable care of himself and contrib to his own injury by want of this care

3 ways a P can be contrib neg’t
1) contribute to the accident
2) expose themselves to risk of accident
3) failure to take reasoanble precautions to minimise injury in the event of accident
* contrib neg’ce must be a cause of the loss in order for it … [visit site to read more]

Legal Tort Law Complaint Samples

admin — Fri, 15 Aug 2008 14:22:28 +0000

3. Intervening Causes

basic issue:is it fair to hold a neg’t actor liable when the conduct of others is also involved in bringing aboutt he accident?

3 catagories of intervening acts:
1. naturally occuring/nonculpable - do not break chain of causation
2. neg;t intervening acts- will break chain of casuation
3. illegal/ deliberately wrongful intervening acts- will break cahin of casuation unless original tortfeasor had a specific duty to prevent the … [visit site to read more]

Difference Tort Law Contract Law

admin — Wed, 30 Jul 2008 14:21:07 +0000

XI REMOTENESS OF DAMAGE
- concern is with the realtionsip btwn the D’s neg’t act and the specific damages sought by the P
1. Directness Versus Foreseeability
a) THE DIRECTNESS TEST
- if it can be found that the D’s act was neg’t. s/he will be held liable for all damages flowing as a direct consequence of that breach. (Re Polemis and Furness, Withy & CO. 1921 KB) -
- test has since been rejected as unfair, illogical, unworkable, too propolaintiff anf theoretically unsound - fails to … [visit site to read more]

Corporate Social Responsibility and Tort Law

admin — Tue, 15 Jul 2008 14:18:54 +0000

2. Independant Tortfeasors and Multiple Causes

2 types of injury:
1. divisible: can be divided into distinct losses, and each loss can be attributed to a particular tortfeasor, giving P separate COAs against each of them
2. indivisible: each tortfeasor is held jointly and severally liable for all of the Ps losses, regardless of whether s/he was a major or minor contributor

Lambton v Mellish (1894 3 ch163)- 2 refreshment vendors with organs … [visit site to read more]

State and Recovery and Tort and Cap

admin — Sat, 14 Jun 2008 13:42:11 +0000

4. An Economic Analysis of the Standard of Care
- Hands Theorem: jury should attmept to measure three things: the magnitude of loss if an accident occurs, the probability of the accident occuring; and the burden of taking precautions that would avert it. If the product of th first two terms exceeds the burden of precautions, the failure to take those precautions is negligence.
5. Special Standards of Care
a) THE DISABLED

general principle: must be a capacity to understand nature of duty … [visit site to read more]

New York Environmental Torts Attorneys

admin — Fri, 30 May 2008 13:39:50 +0000

5. A Manufacturer’s and Supplier’s Duty to Warn
Rule: a manufacturer has a duty to warn of any dangers inherent in the use of its products that are known or ought to be known at the time of sale- warning must be reasonably communicated and clearly describe the danger
Lamber v Lastoplex Chemicals (1971) SCC

Rule: manufacturers duty to warn extends to dangers discovered after the product has been sold and delivered
Rivtow Marine v Washington Iron Works
- note: duty to warn is traceable … [visit site to read more]