Tort reform

The case of Mustang pipeline v. Driver pipeline is a breach of contract case. In a breach of contract the result comes from a party who does not accomplish the contractual promise or if the party seems to be unable to perform the contract. Mustang was the first to bring suit against Driver for the failure to complete the work in a timely manner. However Driver counterclaimed for the wrongful termination of the contract. It is clear that time was of the essence for the completion of the pipeline.…

of a fiduciary relationship. The Court of Appeals in Hunter favorably cited the Terry case as an instructive example regarding the sufficiency of allegations: Terry [v. Terry, 302 N.C. 77, 273 S.E.2d 674 (1981)] is instructive on the sufficiency of allegations. Terry involved a defendant who took advantage of his dying brother by inducing him to sell his portion of a business at an inadequate price. The complaint was sufficient because it described the family relationship, the business…

There are currently five non-fatal offences against the person which are contained within two statutes, namely the Criminal Justice Act (CJA) 1988 and the Offences Against the Person’s Act (OAPA) 1861, as well as being developed within common law. Firstly the law is not codified under one piece of legislation. As the law of non-fatal offences against the person cannot be found within one statute – this makes the law unnecessarily complex. This complexity can be hard for the jury to understand…

From my understanding of the opinion, if SPE knowingly failed to disclose a violation of material statutory, regulatory, or contractual requirement then they have made a misrepresentation that render their claims “false or fraudulent”. First we must establish that the implied certification theory is a basis for liability. There are 2 conditions: (1) Claim does not merely request payment, but also makes specific representations about goods/services provided; and (2) the defendants failure to…

In her appeal, Kontosis challenges the MIA’s determination the Hartford had not engaged in an unfair claims settlement practice. In support of her argument, Kontosis contends that it was an unfair claims settlement practice for Hartford to classify benefits received from the group policy and SSDI as other income under the association policy. Additionally, Kontosis alleges that it was an unfair claims settlement practice to seek reimbursement for the overpayment Hartford made as a result of not…

Nevertheless, on the assumption that Priya has independently verified the wine's vintage, ''then the representee may be held to have relied upon their own judgment and not upon the misrepresentation.''37 This has been demonstrated in Attwood v Small case of 183838 where ''the House of Lords held that the contract could not be rescinded, since the plaintiffs had relied on their own expert and not on the word of the seller. The fact that the expert had failed to discover the truth did not make the…

Personal jurisdiction, which is a decision given by the authority of the court in which it affects the rights of the specific individuals. In this case, because the defendant sold a harmful product, that not only negatively affected the plaintiff physically, but could negatively impact his business which would be the most appropriate. Due to negligence the court will have jurisdiction over them. Subject matter jurisdiction is when the court has the power to hear particular kinds of cases. The…

This case is related to a suit filed by Fitl on Mark. Fitl claimed that he was sold an ungradable sports card by Mark. Mark claimed that Fitl did not inform him of this defect on time due to which he was not liable for any damages faced by him. Court decided in favor of Fitl and awarded him $17, 750. When Stark made an appeal in another court, this decision was maintained in favor of Fitl. In this case study, focus is towards written agreement and its accountability. In case there was a written…

Cause - Then In the early 1980s, consumers had complained to Audi about a sudden acceleration problem in their Audi 5000 vehicles (Wathen, 1987). As a result, in March 1986, the Center for Auto Safety submitted a petition to Audi of America, requesting the recall of all 1978 through 1986 Audi 5000 models for the dangerous malfunction. Later that year, on November 23, 1986, the popular CBS television program 60 Minutes aired a report titled “Out of Control” highlighting the case of Kristi…

The word that the lower court left out of its opinion was “material” from in front of the word “breach.” I believe that Mills’ hope was that this omission would somehow exonerate them from the actual breach they committed (since I agree with the ruling), that since they did not provide the materials necessary for Double Diamond to complete their work, construction was halted and that was not considered a breach on the part of Double Diamond. Had Double Diamond had the proper materials, which…