Long Island RR o But for causation but injury was not reasonably foreseeable

Long island rr o but for causation but injury was not

  • Test Prep
  • volleymama1026
  • 6
  • 100% (3) 3 out of 3 people found this document helpful

This preview shows page 4 - 6 out of 6 pages.

Palsgraf v. Long Island RR o But for causation, but injury was not reasonably foreseeable result so no proximate cause Brown v. Philadelphia College of Osteopathic Medicine (206-209) o Baby tests positive for syphilis, husband uncovered as an adultery, several bad events leading to divorce and loss of jobs o No proximate cause Riojas v. Lone Star Gas o Carbon monoxide poisoning for bringing charcoal inside for warmth o No proximate cause Boyles v. Kerr o Kerr loses because TX doesn’t recognize negligent affliction for emotional distress o Boyles not negligent Intentional Torts McCraney v. Flanagan o No assault Caudle v. Betts o Betts committed battery due to intent to shock Cole v. Dept of Public Safety (212-213) o No consent, battery Hackbart v. Cincinnati Bengals o No consent Lewis v. Equitable Life Assurance o Lewis gets defamation judgement Milkovich v. Lorain Journal Co. o Held for P; Journal did not publish an opinion o rejected the argument that a separate opinion privilege existed against libel Sagan v. Apple Computer o Apple’s statement is a protected opinion Cook v. Des Moines Chrysler Plymouth o False imprisonment of Cook Dupree v. Piggly Wiggly Shop Rite Foods o False Imprisonment of Dupree WalMart Stores v. Cockrell (219-220) o False imprisonment of Cockrell o No probable cause to require bandage to be lifted First City National Bank v. Japhet o Not trespass Villarreal v. Chesapeake Zapata o Trespass motion denied? Driscol v. Household Credit Services o Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress Randall’s Food Markets v. Johnson o No IIED by Randalls Castro v. Castro o IIED; not all abuses accurately covered Midler v. Fors Motor Co. Pennzoll v. Texaco Archives of America Inc v. Archive Litigation Services Inc o No tortious interference of contract b/c urged them to do something they were legally allowed to do; ALS wins Walner v. Baskin-Robbins Ice Cream GTE Southwest v. Bruce (224-228) o IIED, emotional distress from manager on employees 4
Image of page 4
5
Image of page 5
Image of page 6

You've reached the end of your free preview.

Want to read all 6 pages?

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

Stuck? We have tutors online 24/7 who can help you get unstuck.
A+ icon
Ask Expert Tutors You can ask You can ask You can ask (will expire )
Answers in as fast as 15 minutes