ITT We Do Torts Issue Spotting Forum

[Extension_Cord]

Exercise #1
http://law.widener.edu/lawlibrary/servi ... j2001.ashx

Spot the issues and post the ones I missed, We aren't going in detail whether they will win, but we can discuss it if you find something particularly interesting.

Grandma v. Party Goers
1. Negligence (duty to rescue b/c they caused danger)
2. Battery (car roared pasted them, sub. certain to cause apprehension, contact was made it becomes a batter)
3. Assault (same reason as above)

Kitties Father v. Gas Station Owner
1. Negligence (GSO created the risk on his premises, hes liable)

Kitty v. Party Goers
1. Potential IIED (reckless)
2. NIED (closely related, within zone)
3. Assault (not likely to win)

Grandma v. Kitty
1. Negligence both ways

Adult Children v. Grandma
1. Negligence (allowed kitty to drive, potential that they knew Kitty didn't have a licence)

Family v. Gas Station Owner
1. Negligence (not putting up barriers or something to prevent accidents)

Family v. 911 / Ambulance / Hospital
1. Negligence (Ambulance was late, Kitty called 911 before her father but ambulance arrived "around the same time as her father."

Post em'

[istara]

Exercise #1
http://law.widener.edu/lawlibrary/servi ... j2001.ashx

Spot the issues and post the ones I missed, We aren't going in detail whether they will win, but we can discuss it if you find something particularly interesting.

Grandma v. Party Goers
1. Negligence (duty to rescue b/c they caused danger)
2. Battery (car roared pasted them, sub. certain to cause apprehension, contact was made it becomes a batter)
3. Assault (same reason as above)

I don't see this as a battery claim, and she probably wouldn't want to argue it anyway since negligence pays insurance while intentional torts usually do not. Assault wouldn't hurt to argue as long as she saw it coming. Some jurisdictions may allow some kind of pain and suffering if she did not die immediately, but that's questionable. You might also want to frame the answer in terms of wrongful death and survival actions.

If Grandma was particularly incapable, you might also argue an affirmative duty of her children to make sure she gets home safely (though it is a stretch). She also has a potential claim against the gas station owner because he affirmatively offered assistance/rescue and may have done so badly (he moved her: did she have a broken neck?)

Dad (and everyone else, actually) also has an action against the party-goers since they are the ones that set the whole incident in motion (so long as proximate cause is satisfied for any given claim).

[ohiohawk58]

I don't think there can be negligence against the GSO, he had no reason to believe he would get sick. Depends on amount of time between puking and not cleaning it up to determine if he can be liable for that.

Also don't think the ambulance can be negligent. There is a presumption that they came as fast as possible. Would have to prove that they were not acting reasonably (not putting on sirens/lights to avoid traffic jams). They could have come from much further away so it may not matter that they got there at the same time as dad