Scenario 1
Quarterback vs Opposing Player The tort actions caused by the opposing player during the football game were intentional. The reason is because the opposing player did try to tackle the quarterback. The plaintiff in this case would be the quarterback. The opposing player would be the defendant because he is the person who intentionally tried to hit or tackle the quarterback. The quarterback has the right to sue the opposing player because the hit was an intentional battery. This claim will be difficult for the plaintiff to win in court because football is a dangerous sport that consists of many risks.
Malik vs Quarterback Malik is the fan who got injured by ball that was thrown by the quarterback. Malik is considered to be the plaintiff while the defendant is the quarterback. The quarterback is the defendant because he unintentionally assaulted Malik. Malik will sue the quarterback because he was injured by the football. The quarterback in this case owed a duty of care to the plaintiff by carefully throwing or aiming the ball away from the stands.
Malik vs Daniel Daniel got really upset at Malik because he spilled cold beer on his 8 year old son Ruben. Taking matters into his own hands, Daniel shoved Malik causing him to fall and hit the aisle steps, knocking out two front teeth. Malik will sue Daniel. In this case, Malik would be the plaintiff and Daniel would be the defendant because he intentionally used assault and battery through actual cause. Malik will have the strong case against Daniel.
Daniel vs Lady Standing in Line Daniel who would be the plaintiff in this case can sue the lady standing in line at the concession stand for slander. The lady in line who is the defendant intentionally made a huge scene and accused Daniel have giving a beer to a minor. Because Daniel’s boss witnessed the incident that occurred at the concession stand, he was fired. Daniel will take this lady to court for defamation of character.
Malik vs Daniel Malik can sue Daniel in this case for battery because he was shot by Daniel who had a concealed weapon. Malik aimed his unloaded gun at Daniel first, which caused Daniel to draw out his concealed weapon and use it for self defense. When this case is taken to court, it will probably be dismissed due to contributory negligence. Both parties each share a percentage in damages.
Daniel vs. Concession Worker Daniel is the plaintiff in this case, while the concession worker is the defendant. The concession worker owed a duty of care to the plaintiff. She should have been paying attention to what Daniel ordered which was two diet sodas, instead she gives him two sugary soft drinks. These drinks caused him to go into a diabetic coma. Daniel will sue the concession worker under unintentional negligence.
Scenario 2
Anna vs. Italian Restaurant
Non-Intentional
The Italian Restaurant was liable for Anna injury because they have a duty to insure that each customer is serving at a certain standard. The restaurant failed to comply when they served Anna a plate with glass in her food. This caused Anna mouth to bleed and she was in pain because she was crying. The company must find a way to insure that these types of accidents don’t happen because they can be sued each time. Anna can sue the restaurant for any damages to her mouth and sue for any time off for this injury.
Waiter vs. Waiter
Non-Intentional
The waiters are trained how to be an efficient waiters. They have to always be aware of their surroundings when there serving customers. Each waiter has been trained. I don’t think the waiter can be sued because the waiter with the plate should have been looking and when the other waiter spin around he could have moved also. I think it was both of the waiters fault. I don’t think suing will be justifiable.
Old Woman vs. Restaurant
Non-Intentional
The old lady was trampled over by the crowd and had serious injuries. The restaurant is responsible for their customer’s safety inside of their place of business. They breached their contract when they weren’t able to control their customers and the scene became dangerous. The woman has the right to sue them for any pain and suffering. She also can sue them for distress she is old and might never recuperate from the injuries.
Anna vs. Hospital
Non-Intentional
Anna will win her malpractice law suit because the doctor preformed the wrong surgery. Anna was under the impression that she was having surgery to stop the bleeding and allowing the doctors to save her tooth. She didn’t give them permission to amputate her leg. She will be affected for the rest of her life and not to mention without her leg. Anna will be able to live as she was prior to this surgery. These are the many reasons she will be able to sue for a large lump sum of money. The doctor was hired by the hospital so that’s why the hospital and the doctor are responsible.
Scenario 3
Scenario 4 The possible potential plaintiffs in this case are the boy, husband, and his wife. The potential defendants in the case are Randy, Lee, and the security guard. Lee's defense could possibly be that he didn't commit the murder. It is Lee’s word against Randy, the security guard, the wife, the husband, the boy, and whoever witnessed the incident. Randy's possible defense could be that he didn't know that the man was going to shoot the plaintiffs. He has a case, because he has several witnesses that saw what happened. The security guard's possible defense could be that he was just doing his job, the way he was trained to do it. The security guard has several witnesses in this case to protect him and his job. In this case, I think that the wife and husband would possibly sue Lee and/or Buy-Mart in a civil suit. They will probably sue, because the Buy-Mart could possibly be held responsible for Randy not doing his job properly. If Randy did his job correctly then they will probably sue Lee for the damages done to their family. I think that Lee will probably sue the security guard or the security guard company in a civil suit. I think that Lee will probably be guilty of all charges brought up against up him and the husband and wife will more than likely receive a settlement from Buy-Mart. The security guard will probably get fired and I highly doubt that Lee will win a lawsuit against the security guard company. I do not think Lee has any witnesses if he decided to file a lawsuit. If Lee does not have any witnesses, I believe he will not have a chance at winning the case. The security guard has many witnesses compared to Lee not having any witnesses. I highly doubt if Lee is going to appeal this case, because there is too much evidence against him. He could possibly appeal it, but I do not see enough evidence in the passage that will prevent him from being convicted again. He will more than likely get the maximum punishment, because of the lack of witnesses in his case.