Chapter 6: Torts 2/3 Week 2 Notes
Chapter 6: Torts 2/3 Week 2 Notes ACCT 2700
Popular in Business Law
Popular in Accounting
This 2 page Class Notes was uploaded by jcsumlin on Friday March 4, 2016. The Class Notes belongs to ACCT 2700 at Auburn University taught by Robert Hollis Cochran in Spring 2016. Since its upload, it has received 32 views. For similar materials see Business Law in Accounting at Auburn University.
Reviews for Chapter 6: Torts 2/3 Week 2 Notes
Report this Material
What is Karma?
Karma is the currency of StudySoup.
Date Created: 03/04/16
Chapter 6: Torts Friday, March 4, 2016 9:03 AM Audio Recording Audio recording started: 9:03 AM Friday, March 4, 2016 Exam chapters - 4,6,8, 10 Res • Negligence per se (Will be on exam) (will see similar example on exam): may occur if an individual violates a statute or an ordinance providing for a criminal penalty and that violation causes another to be injured. ○ implied negligence ○ Where other statutes are violated which resulted in the injury of another person Traffic rules and regulations are there to prevent death of pedestrians Need to prove that the statutes that were violated caused the accident or injury ○ *Common case in court* ○ Jaywalking doesn't excuse the driver for hitting a pedestrian • Res Ipsa Loquitor: A doctrine under which negligence may be inferred simply because an event occurred, if it is the type of event that would not occur in the absence of negligence. Literally, the term means “the facts speak for themselves.” ○ There is no proof, but there is nothing else that could have happened • Good Samaritan Statutes: may occur if an individual violates a statute or an ordinance providing for a criminal penalty and that violation causes another to be injured. ○ Doctor comes upon an accident victim, should he help the victim. The doctor may be cautions because he could be held for negligence, but this statute protects off duty EMTs Firefighters, doctors, first responders, from being held liable for negligence if there is a mistake and someone is injured ○ Absolves them from any responsibility from injuring someone accidentally in an emergency situation ○ Promotes "Good Samaritan" actions of doctors to aid others ○ Protects from ordinary negligence not gross negligence • Social Host Liability You were speeding and hit a pedestrian. The Pedestrians best legal theory to use to obtain a judgement against you is a. Negligence Per Se Defense to Negligence • The defendant has a reason he/she should not be held liable ○ Assumption of Risk □ Knowledge of the Risk □ Voluntary assumption of the risk □ Voluntary assumption of the risk There's risk in everything that we do The defendant would say that the plaintiff had known the risk of an activity Limits □ If you can obtain insurance for an activity then you can't claim assumption of risk □ If there isn't insurance available, defendant will generally have the plaintiff sign a statement that tells them that there is a lot of risk and that the plaintiff can't sue them ○ Superseding Intervention Cause: that is, it relieves the defendant of liability for injuries caused by the intervening event. Someone is negligent and causes harmed and the victim is sometime later harmed again, A car T-bones another car negligently and the driver gets a broken leg as a result. The ambulance is later hit and the guy with the broken leg is killed as a result of the second negligent driver. The first driver is not responsible the death even though all the negligence tests pass. He can only be held accountable for the broken leg while the second driver is held accountable for the death. ○ Contributory negligence: no matter how insignificant the plaintiff’s negligence was relative to the defendant’s negligence, the plaintiff would be precluded from recovering any damages. ○ Comparative negligence: both the plaintiff’s and the defendant’s negligence are computed, and the liability for damages is distributed accordingly.