Loss of consortium claim allows for some recovery for

Loss of Consortium Claim
Allows for some recovery for "loss of companionship and services. " Generally only allowed for
legal spouses, children for parents, and parents for children. Tigrace has been legally married to
Nancy Yurnblau for over 8 years and they had 3 children. Nancy and her children satisfy the
relationship requirements to recover for a loss of consortium claim but the claim CANNOT be
sustained if the primary physical harm victim's claim does not succeed.
Emotional Distress Claim
Wife hears husband die. Would fail the Impact rule, the zone of danger rule, the zone o-£. danger
Page 12 of 13

rule 2 and the bystander emotional harm rule. Must observe the harm not just merely hear it. ^~
IIED- Survives the death of the plaintiff.
Question #5 Final Word Count =3378
Page 13 of 13

The judge determines duty. The factfinder may be used to make determinations which
influencing whether or not a duty exists.
Question #\ Final Word Count = 20
^
^8
Page 1 of 1
Exam taken with SofTest v11. 0. 666. 94885

The plaintiff is 20% negligent. This means the plaintiff is entitled to $80, 000 in damages. If the
defendant's are jointly and severally liable, the plaintiff can recover $80, 000 from defendant 1.
If the jurisdiction requires 50% negligence by the defendant to be jointly and severally liable, the
plaintiff can recover under both pure comparative fault and' modified comparative fault. Pure =
proportional- plaintiff entitled to $40, 00 from defendant 1. Modified = plaintiff negligence <
50/51% - plaintiff entitled to $40, 000 from defendant 1
If the jurisdiction uses contributory negli^rfce, the plaintiffs negligence would bar him from
recovery.
2^
Question #2 Final Word Count = 97
Page 1 of 1

For
To be found liable, a plaintiff only needs to establish their case by a preponderance of the
evidence. A preponderance of the evidence = plaintiff only needs to show that evidence
supporting claim is greater than half. In these jurisdictions, 5 out of the 9 jurors represents more
than half of the jury. The fact that the jury is so split also provides a rationale for letting the case
go to trial. A jury split like this examplifes why the case should go to the finder of fact, as a
reasonable juror could obviously find for either party.
Against
It can be argued that a preponderance of the evidence means that each juror must feel that the
preponderance of the evidence supported a particular party. By enforcing liability in a 5-4 split, it
leaves 4 members of the jury unconvinced. This can lead to an argument in fairness. If there was
great debate, the defendant might not feel that they were given a fair shot at proving their case.
Several factors could influence that last juror's decision to find for one party or the other.
Jurisdictions with this rule also leave themselves open for a lot of appeals. If one person
represents the difference between liability and non-liability, either decision can create significant
doubt and the losing party will look for any opportunity to appeal the decision. This will have
significant administrative effects. Courts will not be able to look at