Assume that P has suffered $100,000 damages

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
3 Ds cause injury to P. D 1 settles for $200,000 in exchange for P releasing D 1 from further liability. P sues D 2 and D 3, and the jury, in a jurisdiction.
Advertisements

ECON 1450 – Professor Berkowitz Lectures on Chapter 2 Tort Law Area of Common Law concerned with accidental injuries Potential defendant engages in activity.
{ Chapter 10 TORTS: Negligence and Strict Liability.
Tort Law Part 2 Negligence and Liability. Negligence Most common tort Accidental or Unintentional Tort Failure to show a degree of care that a “reasonable”
RISK MANAGEMENT FOR ENTERPRISES AND INDIVIDUALS Chapter 16 Risks Related to the Job: Workers’ Compensation and Unemployment Compensation.
© 2012 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part, except for use as permitted in a license.
Mon. Nov. 25. claim preclusion issue preclusion.
Characterization. substance/procedure Grant v McAuliffe (Cal. 1953)
Grant v McAuliffe (Cal 1953). P ships goods in Mass using D as transport P received printed bill of lading which contains limitations on liability Under.
Law and Economics-Charles W. Upton Levels of Activity.
 joint & several liability  contribution & indemnity  satisfaction & discharge  releases  apportionment  Relationship to comparative fault.
Tort Law Chapter four.
Types of Torts Trespass Assault Battery Negligence Products liability Malpractice Intentional infliction of emotional distress Defamation Invasion of.
© 2010 Pharmacists Mutual Ins. Co. Medication Errors: What Are The Risks and What Can I Do About Them? by Don R. McGuire Jr., R. Ph., J.D. General Counsel.
Chapter 6.  A tort is a wrong  There are three categories of torts  Intentional torts  Unintentional torts (negligence)  Strict liability 6-2Copyright.
Chapter 4 Section 2 Negligence and Strict Liability.
TORTS A tort is committed when……… (1) a duty owing by one person to another, is… (2) breached and (3) proximately causes (4) injury or damage to the owner.
Unit 6 – Civil Law.
Products Liability “Liability for Defective Products”
1 Acme Electronics: Student Coaching Slides. 2 Question 1: Negligence Define Prima Facie Case – Plaintiff’s Burden Defenses – Defendant’s Burden.
Chapter 7: Negligence and Strict Liability Copyright © 2009 South-Western Legal Studies in Business, a part of South-Western Cengage Learning. Jentz Miller.
Chapter 19 Objective At the Conclusion of this lesson students will be able to: Define negligence and its elements Use these elements to analyze cases.
Negligence and Strict Liability. Products Liability The liability of manufacturers, sellers, and others for the injuries caused by defective products.
Negligence. Homework 20.1 and 20.2 – read Chapter and 20.2 – read Chapter 20.
Chapter 20 Negligence. The failure to exercise a reasonable amount of care in either doing or not doing something resulting in harm or injury.
Chapter 6 Product and Strict Liability
Torts A tort is an act or omission which unlawfully violates a person’s right created by the law, and for which the appropriate remedy is a common law.
Chapter 6 Torts and Strict Liability. Copyright © 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall.6-2 Three Kinds of Torts A tort is a wrong.
By Richard A. Mann & Barry S. Roberts
Principles of European Tort Law A Critical Examination Ken Oliphant (Cardiff Law School) BIICL, 23 November 2005.
Public Sector Issues and Trends 2009 David G. Boghosian Boghosian + Associates Professional Corporation Moderator:Roman Parzei City of Brampton Co-Panelist:Peter.
Workplace Torts: Defamation Defamation Requirements: –Defamatory Comments –Disclosure to 3rd Party (“Publication”) –Harm to Good Name Privilege -- Communication.
Contracts Breach of contract not bias for negligent actions By: Xavier L. and Timothy Grasty.
DEFENSES IN GENERAL THE KEY DEFENSES: CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE ASSUMPTION OF RISK BURDEN OF PROOF: ON THE D METHODOLOGY RE CONT. NEG.: EXAMINE COMMON LAW.
Earthquakes Standard 3d. Students know why and how earthquakes occur and the scales used to measure their intensity and magnitude.
親愛的吉姆舅舅: 今天吃完晚餐後,奶奶說,在家 裡情況變好以前,您要我搬到城裡跟 您住。奶奶有沒有跟您說,爸爸已經 好久沒有工作,也好久沒有人請媽媽 做衣服了? 我們聽完都哭了,連爸爸也哭了, 但是媽媽說了一個故事讓我們又笑了。 她說:您們小的時候,她曾經被您追 得爬到樹上去,真的嗎? 雖然我個子小,但是我很強壯,
Chapter 9 Negligence and Strict Liability Copyright © 2015 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior.
Chapter 20. Conduct that falls below the standard established by law for protecting others against unreasonable risks of harm Surgeon forgets to remove.
Copyright © 2010 South-Western Legal Studies in Business, a part of South-Western Cengage Learning. and the Legal Environment, 10 th edition by Richard.
UNIT 1 Chapter 3 Sports Law. Who’s often on the scene 1 st ? THE COACH Inappropriate decisions and actions may jeopardize the injured person and lead.
Defences to negligence
Neglect Torts Chapter 20.
For Professor Ludlum UCO September 12, 2016
Found and Lost: Student Coaching Slides
Bell-work 1/27/17 Read one of the two quotes under World Government and give a brief meaning.
Negligence Mr. Lugo.
Spinal Cord Injury Lawsuits
Negligence Defenses.
Negligence Damages Civil Procedure
Found and Lost: Student Coaching Slides
How to Prove Fault in a Personal Injury Claim
Studies in American Tort Law
Defenses to Negligence
Titanic.
1. Jack had taken his girlfriend Jenny on a long drive
Chapter 7 Strict Liability and Product Liability
Found and Lost: Student Coaching Slides
Chapter 9 TORTS.
Copyright 2001 by Allyn and Bacon
Defences for negligence
Allocation of liability among multiple defendants…. Joint Tortfeasors
Lecture 6 Mon. Sept. 17, 2018.
The Top 5 Reasons to Hire an Attorney After a Car Accident
Wed., Nov. 5.
Smart Binary Center: Student Coaching Slides
Civil Pretrial Practice
Civil Law 3.5 Defenses to Torts
Civil Law 3.4 negligence.
Modified at -
NEGLIGENCE Requirements:
Presentation transcript:

Assume that P has suffered $100,000 damages Assume that P has suffered $100,000 damages. How much will P recover under each of the three approaches to comparative negligence and under the now outmoded contributory negligence approach? P 80% fault P 50% fault P 49% fault Pure comparative negligence Modified CN: P < 50% Modified CN: P’s N ≤ D’s N (49%) Contributory negligence

Assume that P has suffered $100,000 damages Assume that P has suffered $100,000 damages. How much will P recover under each of the three approaches to comparative negligence and under the now outmoded contributory negligence approach? P 80% fault P 50% fault P 49% fault Pure comparative negligence $20,000 Modified CN: P < 50% Modified CN: P’s N ≤ D’s N (49%) Contributory negligence

Assume that P has suffered $100,000 damages Assume that P has suffered $100,000 damages. How much will P recover under each of the three approaches to comparative negligence and under the now outmoded contributory negligence approach? P 80% fault P 50% fault P 49% fault Pure comparative negligence $20,000 $50,000 Modified CN: P < 50% Modified CN: P’s N ≤ D’s N (49%) Contributory negligence

Assume that P has suffered $100,000 damages Assume that P has suffered $100,000 damages. How much will P recover under each of the three approaches to comparative negligence and under the now outmoded contributory negligence approach? P 80% fault P 50% fault P 49% fault Pure comparative negligence $20,000 $50,000 $51,000 Modified CN: P < 50% Modified CN: P’s N ≤ D’s N (49%) Contributory negligence

Assume that P has suffered $100,000 damages Assume that P has suffered $100,000 damages. How much will P recover under each of the three approaches to comparative negligence and under the now outmoded contributory negligence approach? P 80% fault P 50% fault P 49% fault Pure comparative negligence $20,000 $50,000 $51,000 Modified CN: P < 50% $0 Modified CN: P’s N ≤ D’s N (49%) Contributory negligence

Assume that P has suffered $100,000 damages Assume that P has suffered $100,000 damages. How much will P recover under each of the three approaches to comparative negligence and under the now outmoded contributory negligence approach? P 80% fault P 50% fault P 49% fault Pure comparative negligence $20,000 $50,000 $51,000 Modified CN: P < 50% $0 Modified CN: P’s N ≤ D’s N (49%) Contributory negligence

Assume that P has suffered $100,000 damages Assume that P has suffered $100,000 damages. How much will P recover under each of the three approaches to comparative negligence and under the now outmoded contributory negligence approach? P 80% fault P 50% fault P 49% fault Pure comparative negligence $20,000 $50,000 $51,000 Modified CN: P < 50% $0 Modified CN: P’s N ≤ D’s N (49%) Contributory negligence

Assume that P has suffered $100,000 damages Assume that P has suffered $100,000 damages. How much will P recover under each of the three approaches to comparative negligence and under the now outmoded contributory negligence approach? P 80% fault P 50% fault P 49% fault Pure comparative negligence $20,000 $50,000 $51,000 Modified CN: P < 50% $0 Modified CN: P’s N ≤ D’s N (49%) Contributory negligence

Assume that P has suffered $100,000 damages Assume that P has suffered $100,000 damages. How much will P recover under each of the three approaches to comparative negligence and under the now outmoded contributory negligence approach? P 80% fault P 50% fault P 49% fault Pure comparative negligence $20,000 $50,000 $51,000 Modified CN: P < 50% $0 Modified CN: P’s N ≤ D’s N (49%) Contributory negligence

Assume that P has suffered $100,000 damages Assume that P has suffered $100,000 damages. How much will P recover under each of the three approaches to comparative negligence and under the now outmoded contributory negligence approach? P 80% fault P 50% fault P 49% fault Pure comparative negligence $20,000 $50,000 $51,000 Modified CN: P < 50% $0 Modified CN: P’s N ≤ D’s N (49%) Contributory negligence

Assume that P has suffered $100,000 damages Assume that P has suffered $100,000 damages. How much will P recover under each of the three approaches to comparative negligence and under the now outmoded contributory negligence approach? P 80% fault P 50% fault P 49% fault Pure comparative negligence $20,000 $50,000 $51,000 Modified CN: P < 50% $0 Modified CN: P’s N ≤ D’s N (49%) Contributory negligence