Business Environment Module Code: EC4003 Assessment two: Legally Blonde Legally Blonde This assignment will be covering two segments of law, firstly the UK Court Structure will be looked at and secondly Professional Negligence. This assignment will also focus on how these aspects are applied to Legally Blonde. Law is part of our general lives and everywhere you go there is some sort of law behind everything. Law is made up of lots of different rules it is possible to
Words: 1209 - Pages: 5
MCD 2070 – Business Law, Trimester 1 - 2012 Assignment 1 Page 1 of 6 Introduction: In this case, David has been identified as the “Plaintiff” while Robert Boyd Pty. Ltd. has been identified as the “Defendant” [Vicarious Liability]. The issue in this case is whether what rights, if any, does David have against Robert Boyd Pty. Ltd. under the tort of negligent misstatement in relation to Andrew’s assurance relating to the seating capacity of the restaurant. STEP 1: Issue: Does
Words: 1893 - Pages: 8
realized that the company needed to come up with a plan to manage torts and regulatory risks. Common business torts include intentional torts, unintentional torts (negligence) and strict liability. Intentional torts refer to actions that are taken with the intent to cause injury to the plaintiff. Unintentional torts, or negligence, refer to actions that are not taken to directly harm someone but where harm is a foreseeable consequence. The third type of tort is strict liability which means liability
Words: 1118 - Pages: 5
Case 0:05-cv-00668-RHK-JSM Document 61 Filed 02/07/2006 Page 1 of 14 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA Stacy Lawton Guin, Plaintiff, v. Brazos Higher Education Service Corporation, Inc., Defendant. Civ. No. 05-668 (RHK/JSM) MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER John H. Goolsby and Thomas J. Lyons Jr., Consumer Justice Center, Little Canada, Minnesota; Thomas J. Lyons, Lyons Law Firm, P.A., Little Canada, Minnesota, for Plaintiff. Courtney M. Rogers Reid and Matthew E. Johnson
Words: 3818 - Pages: 16
Our consulting team has come up with many different legal actions that Mrs. Farzam could take against Rock-Cookware. The first would be for her to file a negligence suit. For the plaintiff to prove the defendant’s negligence, they must prove that the defendant had a duty of care, that they had breached that duty, that there was injury caused by that breach, and that the breach was an actual and proximate cause of the injury. Unfortunately, Rock-Cookware does owe their customers the duty of safety
Words: 609 - Pages: 3
(1) intentional infliction of emotional distress; and (2) negligent infliction of emotional distress. A claim for negligent infliction of emotional distress is similar to intentional infliction of emotional distress, but only requires showing of negligence rather than intent. A cause of action for negligent infliction of emotional distress consists of (1) a duty of care owed by the defendant to the plaintiff, (2) breach of that duty by the defendant resulting in severe emotional suffering and (3)
Words: 2526 - Pages: 11
i) Upon Julie’s arrest, she would first be taken to the custody sergeant, whose job it is to ensure that her initial detention is authorised, then the officer who arrested her would give brief details for the reason for her arrest. Then the custody sergeant will ask Julie questions such as her date of birth, or her height or address, by law Julie can refuse to answer these questions, but giving false details could result in obstructing a police officer. After this her rights will be detailed by the
Words: 17051 - Pages: 69
Name Kaplan University PA201 – Unit 3 Assignment December 5, 2014 Barsz v. Max Shapiro, Inc., 600 N.E.2d 151 (Ind. Ct. App. 1992) FACTS: Marjorie Barsz brought negligence action against Shapiro’s Delicatessen Cafeteria in Indianapolis to recover for injuries as a result of slipping and falling while in the restaurant. On October 28, 1989, while eating breakfast at Shapiro's, Mrs. Barsz slipped and fell as she walked toward the restroom, stating that she slipped on ‘something’ like ice or
Words: 599 - Pages: 3
Synopsis of Tort Cases In this paper, you will find synopsizes of four tort cases. Each scenario will include the type of tort actions in the case, potential plaintiffs and defendants, elements of the tort claim that constitute the plaintiff’s claim as well as any defenses that the defendant may assert. Additionally, you will find the writer opinion as to how they believe the claim will be resolved along with the legal reasons for their belief. Scenario One The torts actions
Words: 3434 - Pages: 14
wonder whether can sue Evatt for negligent misstatements. In relation the material provided, the issue is whether Evatt owe Norris a duty of care. In this case we could speak about of Duty of care, which comes under the legal concept of negligence, and negligence belongs to the domain of Common Law1. This refers to “the obligation to take responsible care to avoid injury to a person whom, it can be reasonably foreseen, might be injured by an act or omission”2. Related to the case above exposed Evatt
Words: 680 - Pages: 3
