1.
The broad issue that is presented in my client’s case is that Russ filed a suit against David for a claim of alienation of affections and wants to know if he will he be successful in proving the claim in court.
2.
In the Hutelmyer opinion, there were rules articulated that seem to govern the broad issue in my client’s case. The first rule that seems relevant to the broad issue listed above would be that the defendant is not automatically liable for the tort simply because they have become an object of the affections that caused the alienation from the spouse.
Second, in order to prove the tort of alienation of affections, the plaintiff must present evidence that shows: (1) the plaintiff and his or her spouse were happily married and a …show more content…
The defendant, David, consistently perused Lana by writing her letters and poems, moving to Lana’s hometown, and by showing up at the school she taught, places that her and Russ would eat together and even one time at her home. These facts show a blatant disregard for the marriage between Lana and Russ. His action was wrongful as he perused a married woman even after her consistently telling David she was married and such malicious as well; however, he was not solely to blame for the …show more content…
While it is true that David consistently perused Lana by writing her letters and poems, moving to Lana’s hometown, showing up at the school she taught as well as places that her and Russ would eat together, and even one time at her home it cannot be proven that those instances were sole cause of the alienation of affections. At the time of the alienation, David was no longer perusing Lana he decided to respect her wishes and avoided her. It was Lana who began to reread the letters that David had written to her, she was the one who was daydreaming about David which lead to the constant fights, unhappiness and her ultimately her leaving Russ on her own. Based on the rule and relevant facts this is why I would predict that the court would not hold David liable for alienation of affections, as all three elements of the rule were not
The broad issue that is presented in my client’s case is that Russ filed a suit against David for a claim of alienation of affections and wants to know if he will he be successful in proving the claim in court.
2.
In the Hutelmyer opinion, there were rules articulated that seem to govern the broad issue in my client’s case. The first rule that seems relevant to the broad issue listed above would be that the defendant is not automatically liable for the tort simply because they have become an object of the affections that caused the alienation from the spouse.
Second, in order to prove the tort of alienation of affections, the plaintiff must present evidence that shows: (1) the plaintiff and his or her spouse were happily married and a …show more content…
The defendant, David, consistently perused Lana by writing her letters and poems, moving to Lana’s hometown, and by showing up at the school she taught, places that her and Russ would eat together and even one time at her home. These facts show a blatant disregard for the marriage between Lana and Russ. His action was wrongful as he perused a married woman even after her consistently telling David she was married and such malicious as well; however, he was not solely to blame for the …show more content…
While it is true that David consistently perused Lana by writing her letters and poems, moving to Lana’s hometown, showing up at the school she taught as well as places that her and Russ would eat together, and even one time at her home it cannot be proven that those instances were sole cause of the alienation of affections. At the time of the alienation, David was no longer perusing Lana he decided to respect her wishes and avoided her. It was Lana who began to reread the letters that David had written to her, she was the one who was daydreaming about David which lead to the constant fights, unhappiness and her ultimately her leaving Russ on her own. Based on the rule and relevant facts this is why I would predict that the court would not hold David liable for alienation of affections, as all three elements of the rule were not