INTRODUCTION Defendant Ms. Kalani Herrera ("Ms. Herrera") respectfully request the court grants Ms. Herrera 's motion for summary judgment and dismiss the plaintiffs, Mr. And Mrs. Malone 's ("Malones") personal injury claim. The Malones have a brought a personal injury lawsuit against Ms. Herrera under the attractive nuisance doctrine on behalf of themselves and their daughter Maria Malone ("Maria"), a minor who was injured on an a peace of land art while trespassing on Ms. Herrera 's property. However, the plaintiffs have failed to establish elements that are pertinent to the claim. Landowners typically owe no duty to trespassers however, the doctrine of attractive nuisance is an exception to …show more content…
See Spur Feeding Co. v. Fernandez, 472 P.2d 12 (Ariz. 1970) The plaintiffs have failed to prove Maria because of her age could not discover the condition or realize the risk involved in intermeddling with it or in coming within the area made dangerous by it. Maria Malone is an intelligent young lady who at the age of eleven works at an eighth grade level and whose parents trusted Maria 's intelligence enough to assign her go off on her own to find them a secluded spot to have their
Corning, N.Y. (WENY) -- Arbor Housing and Development has officially made an offer to buy the former Northside Blodgett Middle School. They made a $200,000 bid for the vacant Corning middle school. The Corning-Painted Post School Board will vote Wednesday night on the offer. If approved, the public will vote on the sale in the fall. Northside Blodgett has been closed for two years
Facts: Mrs. Moore entered into the Midwest City Target looking for a magnetic chess set and was informed that Target does not sell those. When Mrs. Moore was made aware of this information she started looking in the toy section. She picked up a telescope and the package was priced for around five or six dollars, so she purchased the telescope. Mr. Lanigan became aware of the situation and took the package from her car, led her inside, recited her rights, and accused her of switching price tags to make the item cheaper for her. One of Retail Shrinkage Control Employees also accused her of switching price tags.
Mr. Packard and his wife bought a house in 2009 and applied for a $6,500 tax credit. Mr. Packard did not own a principal residence before, and Mrs. Packard owned and lived a principal residence in the past five year. Two policies can apply for the individual $6,500 tax credit: “first time buyer (§ 36(c)(1))” and “long-term resident exception (§ 36(c)(6))”. In other words, it means a person either first time purchased a principal residence, or owned and used the same residence as such individual’s principal residence for any 5-consecutive-year period during the 8-year period. Mr. Packard was qualified for “first time buyer” but not for “long-term resident exception”, and Mrs. Packard was qualified for “long-term resident exception” but not
DISCUSSION I. Under the Ohio Duty of Care Owed to Trespasser Statute, even though Oleg Burov likely knew that children might trespass on his property, he will likely not be liable for a slip and fall injury Frank Gaad sustained outside a hot tub on Burov’s property. Using the doctrine of attractive nuisance the Ohio Duty of Care Owed to Trespasser Statute establishes the liability of real property owners for injuries sustained by minor trespassers. Mayle v. McDonald Steel Corp., No. 2010-T-0090, 2011 Ohio App. LEXIS 4319, at *18 (Ohio Ct. App. Oct. 7, 2011).
The year is 1963, and Clarence Earl Gideon is falsely accused of a crime. Under Florida law, being charged with breaking and entering with the intent to commit a misdemeanor is a felony, and Mr. Gideon was the unfortunate victim here (Facts par 2). Like many Americans of his time, Clarence had only an eighth education (Facts par 1). He roamed in and out of prisons, which explains why he was poor (Facts par 1). Lacking the funds to pay an attorney, Clarence requested the judge to appoint him one (Facts par 2).
Summary In the article “Actress from law firm ad files $1 million for breach of contract lawsuit," the author, Barbara Ross, Ginger Adams Otis, explains why actress Elena Aroaz. Believed that her contract which was for her to appear in a 30 second commercial only in local areas for a period of 1 year. Aroaz filed the breach of contract lawsuit saying “After the spoof ad became a sensation — even getting a mention in the New York Times — the producer licensed it and the rights to Aroaz’s image to several other law firms around the country without her knowledge, she says in court papers.” According to this article it seems that her claim would fall into a breach of contract.
Verizon agreed that they would cut some requirements from the workers’ mandatory overtime. The new rules stated that workers had to work 7.5 hours of overtime per week. The maximum hours of overtime they could work was 10 hours. They also will pay bilingual workers, that have to do jobs that require them being fluent in another language more than the average worker.
1. Is the Court correct? Explain your reasoning The United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit reversed the lower courts approval of the drug checkpoint saying, “the checkpoint contravened the Fourth Amendment” (Cornell University Law School LII, 2000). The United States Supreme Court affirmed that decision stating that the, “checkpoint program was indistinguishable from a general interest crime control” (Cornell University Law School LII, 2000) that violated the Fourth Amendment.
A feral child is a human that has lived without love and support from their parents, also they have lived far away from human contact since they were little. Oxana Malaya was cared by wild dogs at the age of 3 because of her parents’ negligence. Subsequently, she learned to walk on all fours, growled, bark, and sniffed at her food before she ate it. She was found 5 years later, and she could hardly speak. There are many effects of the negligence towards these children, for example Oxana, looked much older than what she really was.
A Civil Action is a movie based on a true story about an epic courtroom showdown where Jan Schlichtmann, a tenacious personal-injury attorney files a lawsuit against two of the nation's largest corporations. He accuses, Beatrice Foods and W. R. Grace Company for causing the deaths of children from water contamination by the illegitimate dumping of chemical wastes into natural water sources. The first issue brought up in this movie is concealing or misrepresenting of the truth also known as deceit. Deceit occurs when an individual withholds or misrepresents information by making false statements with the intent of altering another person’s position on a matter. In the movie, Jan does some personal investigations after he notices that there’s
You Will Be The Judge Facts: The case involves a 12 year old child named Griffin Grimbly who told the teacher that he was beaten with a clothesline by his father Mr.Gimli. In court, the Mr.Gimli argued that he was devoted to Christian and was following the Biblical injunction on child rearing, “Spare the rod and spoil the child”, as well as arguing that s 43 of the criminal code gives parents the right to use “reasonable force” in disciplining their children. Issue: Is Mr. Grimbly is guilty of or not guilty of assault ? Held: Mr.Grimbly is guilty of assault.
Read Case 10-2, Welge v. Planters Lifesavers, on page 243. What theory of liability did Justice Posner use in finding the defendant liable? Judge Posner used the strict product liability theory in finding the defendant liable (Herron, 2011). Under the strict product liability theory, K-Mart (seller) would be held liable for defects in their products even if those defects were not introduced by them; also for failing to discover them during production (Herron, 2011).
Julian wants to sue David, the other player. In his complaint, which tort theory is Julian’s attorney most likely to allege and what will he have to prove for Julian to be successful? Julian’s attorney is most likely to allege Intentional Tort for his complaint to be successful. An intentional tort occurs whenever someone intends an action that results in harm to a person’s body, reputation, emotional well-being, or property. During the game David kicked Julian in the head while Julian was in possession on the ball.
What is Amicus Curiae: 1) Amicus Curiae is Latin which stands for “friend of the court”. A non-party with an interest in the outcome of a pending lawsuit who argues or presents information in support of or against one of the parties to the lawsuit. 2) An amicus curiae brief is a persuasive legal document filed by a person or entity in a case, usually while the case is on appeal, in which it is not a party but has an interest in the outcome—typically the rule of law that would be established by the court in its ruling. Amicus parties try to “help” the court reach its decision by offering facts, analysis, or perspective that the parties to the case have not. 3) One of the best explanation of an amicus as stated by Lord Salmon in the court
The relation between property and the actions that could have an injurious effect on those who surround us has been the object of many researchers, not only in the economic field, but in the legal one, too. It finds the main reason in the presence of multiple controversial cases that arise every day because of the relations that individuals suffer with other individuals, companies or even the government. In this particular case we have two parties composed by Eddie, who has an electrical company which discharges smoke. On the other hand it’s Lucille, owner of a laundry who apparently receives the damage, for the clothes get dirty because of the smoke of the electric company. However, as we will see later, there are problems that emanate of