A's torts outline

A's torts outline - I EXAMPLE OF A TORT SUIT/TORT LAW IN CONTEXT • Tort=wrong or trespass • When the law recognizes misconduct as a tort it

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–3. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: I. EXAMPLE OF A TORT SUIT/TORT LAW IN CONTEXT • Tort=wrong or trespass • When the law recognizes misconduct as a tort, it entitles the V to invoke the legal system to respond to the wrong • To commit a tort is to act in a manner that is wrongful toward and injurious to another • Refers to the collection of recognized legal claims that enable a person (or entity) to obtain redress from another on the ground that he (or it) has suffered injury by virtue of having been wronged by that other • Tort law=rules and principles that define right conduct, circumstances under which a victim can obtain redress, and the form that such redress may take • Tort law articulates legal responsibilities or duties that persons owe to one another, and provides V of conduct breaching those duties with redress against those who have wronged them • Only one way among many to answer qs about responsibility (ex. there was a separate investigation of Lovin’s act, which led to a consent agreement) o Tort system compensates in a way that an administration agency may not (they sanction or regulate) • Primary purpose of tort law to spread the cost of accidents CASE: Walter v. Wal-Mart (Me. 2000) Jury awarded Walter $550,000 for her claim of pharmacist malpractice after she was given the wrong cancer medication After the 2-day trial, both parties moved for judgment as a matter of law o W-M on the ground that P had failed to present expert testimony on the standard of care by pharmacists; motion denied (where professional negligence and its harmful results are sufficiently obvious so as to lie within common knowledge, no expert testimony is necessary) o Walter’s motion was granted; concluded that she was entitled to judgment on liability Wal-Mart was negligent: Walter had the burden to prove that WM owed a duty of care to her that it had breached, thereby causing her harm o Pharmacist’s testimony established the standard of care was breached: Admitted he had made an error by confusing names, that his serious error did not satisfy the proper standard of care for a pharmacist, would have discovered the error if he had followed the counseling procedures Causation: there must be some reasonable connection between the act or omission of the ∆ and the damage that the Π suffered o Uncontroverted medical evidence that the drug caused damage to her body W-M claims Walter was comparatively negligent in not noticing that the drugs were different and did not contact her physician immediately after symptoms began o (1) Walter had never taken the medication before and so had no reason to know they were incorrect; (2) jury was, however, permitted to reduce her 1 award for “failing to mitigate” by calling her doctor • WM being sued through theory of respondeat superior o Employer may be held vicariously liable for wrongful acts of its employees committed within the scope of their employment o Adds another entity to the roster of potentially responsible parties, not...
View Full Document

This note was uploaded on 04/09/2008 for the course LAW TORTS taught by Professor Sebok during the Fall '08 term at Yeshiva.

Page1 / 52

A's torts outline - I EXAMPLE OF A TORT SUIT/TORT LAW IN CONTEXT • Tort=wrong or trespass • When the law recognizes misconduct as a tort it

This preview shows document pages 1 - 3. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online