Tort reform

What is tort Tort in law means a wrong or injury which has certain characters, from the most important of which is that it is redressable in an action for damages at instance of the person wronged or injured Torts are civil wrong resulting in personal injury or harm that constitutes grounds for a law suit.Thus, tort law addresses conflicts between conflicts between private individuals or entities According to Prof.Winfeild ,Tortuous liability arises from breach of a duty primarily fixed by law;…

Facts: In 2010, Adwoa Gyabaah was hit by a by a bus owned by Rivlab Transportation Corporation. After the accident, Gyabaah hired; Jeffrey Aronsky as her attorney to represent her in court. They would be in negotiations with Rivlab, their insurance company: National Casualty Company, and their attorneys. Early on, Gyabaah agreed to pay Aronsky a contingency fee of one-third the of her finalized recovery. In late August, 2010 Aronsky presented the plaintiffs personal injury action on their behalf…

A tort is a civil wrong that are done by one party against another or causes someone else to suffer loss or harm resulting for the person who commits the act. Tort law decides whether a person should be held legally responsible for injury against another, and what type of compensation the injured party is entitled to. There are 4 elements to tort law which are duty, breach of duty, causation and injury. The first element is known as the “duty of care.” A duty of care arises when the law…

Injured While On A Cruise? Learn How To Be Compensated Summer vacations are a time to relax and unwind, especially if you are taking a cruise. Unfortunately, an unexpected injury can take your vacation to a grinding halt. If you are injured while vacationing on a cruise ship, you may have the right to legal compensation for your injuries. You Must Prove Negligence The only way a cruise ship can be responsible for your injuries is if they were negligent in some way. This means that they acted…

People who own pets, whether they are domestic or wild animals, can be held to a strict liability standard in most states when it comes to the injury of another by their pet, whether it is harm done to another person or to another animal. Strict liability is "applicable even when a defendant is neither negligent nor has any intent of wrongdoing." It is therefore not necessary to prove that the owner had knowledge of an animal's ability to be vicious or that the owner did not take the…

This question focuses heavily on ‘reasonable foreseeability’. Reasonable foreseeability is a “mechanism which limits the type of plaintiffs, risks or damages which the defendant is liable for ”. For an event to be foreseeable, the claimant, and the kind of injury that was caused, must be foreseeable. The claimant, Daryl, must be in the area that danger is created by the defendant's, Rick, carelessness and the injury must be a type that is likely to occur in the circumstances. To be able to prove…

The only acts alleged by Dr. Stout are purported breaches of contract. Further, Dr. Stout has failed to allege any “substantial aggravating circumstances,” which is necessary to transform a breach of contract claim into an UDTPA claim. Therefore, it is appropriate for the Court to dismiss Dr. Stout’s sixth counterclaim against the Practice. vi. Negligent Misrepresentation Claim Dr. Stout’s final claim against the Practice, which is plead in the alternative, seeks recovery of damages,…

Mr. Johnson, You asked me to brief the People v. SM case in preparation for your meeting with our client. In SM, the defendant, who has a reputation for being a peaceful and law-abiding citizen shot four boys who were older and more athletic than him all of whom, were in the wrestling and football team. The defendant was outnumbered four to one. At no time did the defendant stand his ground or advance to the other boys. Rather, he tried to run away and called for onlookers to get help. The…

The principles relating to the application of the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur in general, are well settled and applied consistently. The maxim Res Ipsa Loquitor, allows the claimant to succeed in action for negligence even when there is no evidence as to what caused the accident and whether it was attributable to negligence on the part of the defendant. It shifts the onus of burden to the defendant. In its shift from the general maxim of - ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat (the…

MEMORANDUM TO: Cheryl Olsen, Legal Counsel for Greene’s Jewelry FROM: Kyle Hulce SUBJECT: Jennifer Lawson – Confidentiality Violation and Alleged Wrongful Termination DATE: September 26, 2018 CC: Lisa Peele, Head of Human Resources Application of the Law to the Facts: The Captain Co. v. Towne case showed us that it is an inextricable requirement to prove that the information the plaintiff seeks to protect must be unique to that particular organization and not general knowledge acquired working…