Was careless and the other was intentional should

This preview shows page 28 - 30 out of 46 pages.

was careless and the other was intentional – should have apportioned liability among ∆ and the unknown assailantc.Absent parties are not considered to be parties in a suitd.Public policy considerationsi.∆ will always ask to apportion liability to other peopleii.∆ should bear the responsibility for getting the other ∆10.Note 2 – Dibenedetto Casea.Points out that other jurisdictions allow percentage of fault to absent ∆b.The burden is then on the to find the other partiesπvii.Indemnification1.By virtue of a contract, a person or entity has promised to indemnify (reimburse) the tortfeasor for certain liabilities2.Most common example is a liability insurance policy3.Liability insurance is to help against accidentally caused losses (not intentional)4.States will have statutory provisions involving insurability of intentionally wrongful acts – it will hold them void5.Interinsurance Exch v Floresa.Sanders was driving his van when Perez shot Flores on the sideof the roadb.Declaratory Judgment action – the insurance company is tryingto determine whether they are going to be required to indemnifyc.The court found that the insurance company did not have to cover the accident because of the contract agreementd.Interpret the contract and identify the key terms to determine whether the necessary elements have been established to state a claime.Public policy - The unenforceability of the contracti.AN insurer is not liable for the loss caused by the willful act of the insured
1.More than just a voluntary act2.Must act with the intent to harm in order to prevent the enforcement of the policy6.Liability insurance – In exchange for regular payments, the insurer issues a policy that:a.Promises to indemnify liabilities incurred by any insured, but only to the extent specified in the policy andb.Promises to pay for and manage the defense of any liability claim brought against an insured that plausibly might fall within the insurer’s promise to indemnify3.Intentional Tortsa.Ancient Lineagei.Houton v Paston (1321) - ∆ beat and wounded – gave him 14 splinters in πthe head ii.I de S et ux v. W de S (1348) – assault – a man suing on behalf of his wife out of fear when a man wanted to buy wine beat the door with a hatchet and when the wife put her head out of the window the guy with the hatchet struck at herb.Batteryi.Intentionally causing another to suffer a harmful or offensive contactii.Prima Facie case1.A actsa.Needs to be intentional 2.Intending to cause contact with a πa.Some degree of physicality (Leichtman– blowing smoke in a πface for the purpose of causing discomfort)b.Extended personality (Fisher – an employee’s snatching of a plate constituted offensice touching)3.The contact with that A intends is of a harmful or offensive typeπa.Objective Test – “offends a reasonable sense of personal dignity”4.A’s act causes to suffer a contact that is harmful or offensiveπiii.Touching1.Harmfula.Cecarelli v Maheri.was beaten by three assailants outside a danceΠii.was able to recovered damages for medical treatmentΠ

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture