BUS 415 Week 3 Synopsis of Tort Cases Paper (Scenario 1)

BUS 415 Week 3 Synopsis of Tort Cases Paper (Scenario 1) -...

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Fan v. Team Negligent by having arm broken. Likely assumptions of the risk because he did go to a football game where footballs would likely go into the stands. Not a winner Rubern v. Malik Ruben was negligent in spilling his drink on Malik. Malik injured him by spilling beer on him, but it was accidental and he assumed the risk going to a baseball game Malik v. Daniel Yes, Malik has a claim for intentional battery against Daniel for shoving him and Daniel is liable for all injuries Malik suffered as a result, since its foreseeable that he could have been seriously hurt, although impractical that the railing may break. Daneil could allege that not his fault, since injuries were extensive due to faulty railing, and not foreseeable, and that even if he loses should have that money indemnified by stadium. Malik v. Stadium Can sue for faulty railing, since foreseeable someone could grab onto it hard and that it should not give way. They breached duty of care and would be partially liable for Malik's injuries.
Background image of page 1
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

This note was uploaded on 11/01/2010 for the course BUSINESS 415 taught by Professor Rogerrodriguez during the Spring '10 term at University of Phoenix.

Ask a homework question - tutors are online