100%(4)4 out of 4 people found this document helpful
This preview shows page 1 - 5 out of 22 pages.
Pgs 20-2200:57Pgs 20-22Soldano v. O’Daniels: California Court of Appeals•What Happened?oVillanueva pulled a gun and threatened the life of Soldano at Happy Jack’s Saloon (Bar 1). A patron of Happy Jack’s ran across the street to Circle Inn, informed the bartender of the threat and asked the bartender to either call the police or allow him to use the phone to call the police. The bartender refused both requests. Villanueva shot Soldano to death.oWrongful Death Action:Plaintiff: Soldano’s ChildDefendants: Bartender and his employerTrial Judge dismissed the claim in response to the defendants’ motion for summary judgment.Plaintiff appealedoDefendant Argues:The request that its employee call the police is a request that it do something. The established rule that one who has not created peril ordinarily does not have a duty to take affirmative action to assist an imperiled person.The Supreme Court has identified certain factors to be considered in determining whether a duty is owed to third persons.•These factors include:oThe forseeability of harm to the plaintiffoThe degree of certainty that the plaintiff suffered injuryoThe closeness of the connection between the defendant’s conduct and the injury sufferedoThe moral blame attached to the defendant’s conduct
oThe policy of preventing future harmoThe extend of the burden to the defendantoConsequences to the community of imposing a duty to exercise care with resulting liability for breachoThe availability, cost and prevalence of insurance for the risk involvedConclusion – The bartender owed a duty to the plaintiff’s decedent to permit the patron from Happy Jack’s to place a call to the police or to place the call himself.Supreme CourtIntermediate CourtsTrial CourtsLawsuits in the U.S. are most often against the 3rd or 4th “person” involved in wrongdoing, as opposed to those directly involved/responsible.Why?If 1st/2nd responsible has no money = No money from settlementIf 3rd/4th responsible has money = High settlementTarasoff v. Regents of University of California•What Happened?
Pgs 34-4400:57Pgs 34-44
Pgs 34-4400:57Problems of JurisdictionJurisdiction (General) – The legal power of a governmental body or official to take some type of action.Jurisdiction (Courts) – The power to adjudicate (to hear and decide a case and render a judgment that is legally binding on the parties).•Has such power only if it has both:o1. Subject Matter Jurisdictiono2. Personal Jurisdiction1. Subject Matter Jurisdiction•