Preview

Negligence and Points

Satisfactory Essays
Open Document
Open Document
472 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
Negligence and Points
Week 3 Assignment Christopher Carlton
1. What court decided the case in the assignment? (2 points)
The court decided for the defendants to prevail because premises liability and negligent infliction of emotion.
2. According to the case, what must a party establish to prevail on a motion for summary judgment? (3 points)
Establish grounds for there enough cause for a motion.
3. Briefly state the facts of this case, using the information found in the case in LexisNexis. (5 points)
The facts of the case found in LexisNexis is: a child was burnt, not determined if the coffee was served scolding hot or not, no breach of warranty, and no negligence of emotional damage.
4. According to the case, why was this not a case of negligent infliction of emotional distress, and what tort did the court approve? (5 points)
The court did approve punitive damages but Burger King had nothing to do with the child being burnt by the coffee.
5. According to the case, why didn't the court approve summary judgment for product liability claims? (5 points)
Because it wasn’t stated on the cup, Hot.
6. Do you agree with this decision? Why or why not? (5 points)
I do not agree that just because someone accidentally poured coffee(because unless you say you want it cold it comes hot) on their child. It is only because of this accident that caused the customers to sue Burger King.
A. the name and citation of the case (5 points); State ex rel. Thomas J. Coyne, Jr., et al., Plaintiffs, vs. The American Tobacco Company Inc., et al., Defendants.
B. the name of the court which decided the case (3 points); US District Court for the Northern District of Ohio(Eastern Division).
C. the year of the decision (2 points); March 17, 1999.
D. the facts of the case (5 points); There were no warning signs on tobacco products, Ohio supplier was liable for warn when he should have known the dangers of the product, and defendants were charged with breach of negligence for not displaying

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Good Essays

    The purpose of this memorandum is to outline the important aspects of the case, Mathews v. Eldridge, and write a case brief using the FIRAC method.…

    • 407 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    R Vs Robert

    • 577 Words
    • 3 Pages

    1. What is the proper citation for the case you have chosen? Who are the parties to the appeal and what is each of their role in the appeal? What category of law does the case fall into and how do you know that?…

    • 577 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Issue. Was Estrada entitled under the law to recover damages for negligent infliction of emotional distress?…

    • 592 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    Esposito v. SFX

    • 1107 Words
    • 5 Pages

    “The tort of ‘intentional infliction of emotional distress’ is defined in PJI 3:6 (1997 Supp) as follows: ‘One who (intentionally and for the purpose of causing severe emotional distress, recklessly 2 )…

    • 1107 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    This case was a foundational case for the establishment of negligent infliction of emotional distress or, NIED. This case relied on the concept of foreseeability to determine if the defendant owed damages to the bystander. The court established foreseeability using the following criteria:…

    • 1539 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Briefly – state the facts of this case, using the information found in the case in LexisNexis. (5 points)…

    • 312 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    The defendant appealed the decision by the State of Nevada Trail Court which awarded the plaintiff money for his physical and emotional damages after the plaintiff purchased and consumed part of a Squirt soda which contained a dead mouse, hair and dung in the Squirt bottle. In order to hear this case, the state of Nevada adopted the doctrine of strict liability (Cheeseman, 2013 p. 110). The Supreme Court of Nevada awarded the plaintiff $2,500 dollars for his physical and emotional damages (Shoshone Coca-Cola Bottling Company V. Dolinski, 1966 p.859).…

    • 843 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    4. According to the case, why was this not defamation, and what tort did the court approve a filing for? (5 points)…

    • 385 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Soldano Vs O

    • 288 Words
    • 1 Page

    Facts: The plaintiff, Soldano attempted to contact the police from a phone at the Happy Jacks Saloon after receiving a threat. The defendant, Happy Jacks and the bartender did not allow the plaintiff to use the phone. The defendant is being charged with negligence in the death of the father of the plaintiff. The defendant contends that the request of its employee to call the police is a request to do something. Citing Restatement Second of Torts section 314, The fact the actor realizes or should realize that action on his part is necessary for another aide or protection does not of itself impose upon him a duty to take such action. The lower court found that the defendant was not responsible for action in the death of the plaintiff’s father. The plaintiff appealed and the appeals court sided with the plaintiff and allowed for the case to go to trial.…

    • 288 Words
    • 1 Page
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Bregligence Case

    • 255 Words
    • 2 Pages

    2) Did the defendant use the same amount of reasonable care that another person in his position would have used to prevent harm?…

    • 255 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Better Essays

    5) "Roper v. Simmons." Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia. 15 Apr. 2010. Web. 21 Apr. 2010. <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roper_v._Simmons>.…

    • 2235 Words
    • 9 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Better Essays

    Procedure: The jury first found for Mr. Faverty. Then Faverty filed suit against McDonald’s, and McDonald’s appealed.…

    • 1194 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    4. According to the case, why was this not defamation, and what tort did the court approve a filing for? (5 points)…

    • 632 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    We filed a complaint last month in trial court alleging that there was negligence on the part of the store. We were seeking an award for damages. In the answer to the complaint the store alleges that Samantha Smith had a duty to avoid the spill, and was unable to fulfill that duty because she was distracted by her misbehaving child. The store claims that her being distracted makes her equally at fault for the injuries sustained in her trip and fall accident.…

    • 312 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Express Bus Company Case

    • 1826 Words
    • 8 Pages

    It is worth explaining at the outset of this judgment about the definition of negligence. Negligence is the omission to do something which a reasonable man, guided upon those considerations which ordinarily regulate the conduct of human affairs, would do, or doing something which a prudent and reasonable man would not do . In order to succeed in claiming negligence, the claimants must show “on the balance of probabilities”…

    • 1826 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Powerful Essays