Ques: what does duty to mitigate mean? Explain with at least two examples. Ans: When a person suffers damages as a result of a breach of contract, he or she has the legal obligation to minimize the effects and losses resulting from the injury. The duty to mitigate works to deny recovery of any part of damages that could have been reasonably avoided. "Reasonably avoided" has no specific definition, but generally means what a reasonable person would do under similar circumstances. An innocent party
Words: 531 - Pages: 3
some condition on the premises by the owner/operator; (2) that the condition posed an unreasonable risk of harm; (3) that the owner/operator did not exercise reasonable care to reduce or eliminate the risk; and (4) that the owner/operator's failure to use such care proximately caused the plaintiff's injuries. Keetch v. Kroger 845 S.W.2d 262. (Tex. 1992)
Words: 639 - Pages: 3
Anthony Macias’ assumption that his participation in the weekend golf game could be a reasonable expectation of his work, and hence should be compensable. The rule governing this claim is a statute, California Labor Code § 3600(a)(8). The rule states: An injury is compensable if the injury arises from the scope of the employee’s employment. For off-duty events, an injury is within the scope of the employment if participation in it is a reasonable expectancy of employment. Reasonable expectancy is
Words: 1837 - Pages: 8
Negligence Mishap A health care provider has a responsibility to provide safe and competent care to his or her patient. When a patient’s care is compromised, is not satisfied with his or her care, or does not have a successful outcome the legal system becomes involved because of today’s litigious society. Health care providers see lawsuits wrongfully filled, not valid, and some unjustly settled as seen in history of some cases settled, which society was just going for the money settlement. Yet there
Words: 1365 - Pages: 6
consider the law relating to negligent misstatement. It can be argued that Figaro was deliberately trying to mislead Susanna, as tort of deceit is mentioned in Derry v Peek (1889). It is necessary to prove three elements when bringing a claim against negligence: duty of care, breach of duty and damage, which is the cause of breach of duty and is not to remote. Consideration of these aspects in these stages should be noticed, for example Lord Atkin whom founded the neighbour principle mentioned in the Donoghue
Words: 2226 - Pages: 9
Assignment 1: Patrick & Mary v Don 1. Issue This incident revolves around 3 parties where Patrick and Mary are the investors of a company called Kill Cancer Pty Ltd, particularly for an up and coming drug named “Miracle”. They are the plaintiff in this case. The defendant is Don, who is a financial adviser by profession and a friend of Patrick. This case involves action taken by the plaintiff due to the advice given by the defendant, and as such it is a case for the tort of negligent misstatement
Words: 2068 - Pages: 9
ge » Other Topics Tort and Conflict of Laws In: Other Topics Tort and Conflict of Laws CHAPTER 1 An Introduction 1.1 Introduction: The peculiar feature that tort occupies in private international law is that if the tortious act has been committed entirely locally, then lex loci delicti governs it, irrespective of the fact that whether it has or has not some foreign element, such as, both or one of the parties is domiciled or resident abroad or national of another country. The foreign
Words: 352 - Pages: 2
Compensation culture Compensation culture describes a society in which it is acceptable for anyone who has suffered a personal injury to seek compensatory damages through litigation from someone connected with the injury. It’s the idea that for every accident someone is at fault. For every injury, there is someone to blame. And, perhaps most damaging, for every accident, there is someone to pay. There are so many ridicilous cases througout history where people sue somebody or some company
Words: 266 - Pages: 2
In scenario number three, I believe fraud is the most obvious tort action where the customers can sue Franco and Sure Company for their deception. Franco can also possibly file defamation against his employer because they insulted him in front of the other employees of the company. Franco can also sue the Company for violating his right to protest and the tort of intentional battery by the former employee being escorted out by security. The potential plaintiffs are the customers that were deceived
Words: 409 - Pages: 2
1. The court that decided the case Nadel vs. Burger King was The Court of Appeals of Ohio, First District, Hamilton County. 2. Summary judgment is a way to avoid unnecessary trial, and a party must establish two things. First there should be no genuine issue of material facts, and second the party who makes the motion must be entitled to judgment as a matter of law, and that it can be noted from the evidence that when viewed from a perspective that is strongly in favor of the nonmoving
Words: 755 - Pages: 4
