acct352 Test 2 - Acct352 Test 2 Torts Tort law- give...

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

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Acct352 Test 2 Torts Tort law- give monetary or some sort of compensation for party A injuring Party B-liable vs. not liable. -offense against an individual( harm to person or property) -plaintiff vs. defendant (winner is whoever seems to be telling more truth) -money damages to the victim Unintentional Torts- Negligence, strict liability, product liability. Intentional Torts (Not covered by insurance) Unintentional Torts (victim gets hurt because someone else, did not show “duty of care”) To prove negligence you need to prove 4 things(Prima Facie Case): 1) Duty of care- plaintiff must show defendant owed a duty of care 2) Breach of duty- breach duty of care 3) Causation-plaintiff needs to show it was the actual cause and the proximate cause 4) Damages- prove injuries to justify the payment Duty of Care -you have the right to take a risk, but some actions are acceptable and some are not. -Would a reasonable person have done this? -Duty of care is owed only to foreseeable plaintiffs -Duty of care does not extend to a “failure to act”( there is no “duty to rescue”) Breach of Duty -Should have done something, but you didn’t -failure to act Causation (Actual before proximate) 1) Actual Cause- if the negligent act of the defendant had not been there, the defendant wouldn’t have been hurt 2) Proximate Cause- There needs to be an element of foreseeability. If it wasn’t foreseeable then the defendant is not liable Damages (physical, emotional, psychological) - Actual injuries that can be proven for a reasonable amount of money Palsgraf v. LIRR - Palsgraf was the lady who got a freight weight fallen on her because of the fireworks on the track. She sued LIRR and there was no proximate cause, it was not foreseeable Defenses of Negligence Claims
Background image of page 1

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

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Assumption of Risk- If a plaintiff assumes the normal risk, knowingly, he cannot receive compensation for injuries. “the plaintiff doesn’t assume a risk different or greater than the
Background image of page 2
Image of page 3
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

This note was uploaded on 10/20/2010 for the course ACCT acct352 taught by Professor Depue during the Spring '10 term at University of Delaware.

Page1 / 4

acct352 Test 2 - Acct352 Test 2 Torts Tort law- give...

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