B public utilities strauss v belle realty co sebok

This preview shows page 26 - 28 out of 52 pages.

We have textbook solutions for you!
The document you are viewing contains questions related to this textbook.
Sexuality Now: Embracing Diversity
The document you are viewing contains questions related to this textbook.
Chapter 16 / Exercise 3
Sexuality Now: Embracing Diversity
Carroll
Expert Verified
(4) party’s justifiable reliance on city’s affirmative undertaking.b.Public Utilities- Strauss v. Belle Realty Co: (Sebok – RISS on steroids) P said Con Edison utilities owed her duty of care b.c suffered injury during blackout in common area of apt building where P’s landlord had K relationship with utility comp. Utility comp was reckless with power stations.i.Holding: Utlity company owed no duty to P b/c no privity. Cuz it was common area the duty is owed by landowner. ii.Reasoning: used public policy to make decisions i.e Con Ed not going bankrupt. iii.Seboke empahsiss arg “b/c we owe duty to everybody we don’t owe duty to nobody”--. Thinks crazy ***REDRESS – Dmgs Or InjunctionThree types of Dmgs: 1.Nominal: a token for a tort w/o loss ($1)more important for intentional torts 2.Compensatory: $ owed by D to P in compensation for what D has to done to Pa.Jury Instruction: Should award P amount of $ that will fairly & adequately compensate P for P’s loss, injury,dmg, including any dmg P is reasonably certain to (incur) n future.3.Punitive: $ owed by D to P as punishment for egregious mistreatment, or further deterA.COMPENSATORY: a.P entitled to “fair, adequate” and/or reasonable dmgs i.Economic: past and future lost earnings and costs (more readily quantifiable)ii.Non-economic: victimization, disfigurement, past and future P&S (no metrics to quantify). CA caps these dmgs in med mal cases at $250K- biggest burden on those with less economic dmgs (retirees)b.Smith v. Leech Brain & Co: Eggshell Skull Rule. P burned at work. Cancer developed at site of burn. He dies. Widow files suit for neg. D arg: should just b liable for forseeable dmgs. i.Holding: Eggshell Rule: Amount of tortfeasors dmgs not reduced b/c P suffered gr8er injury than another might have due to’s “unusually thin skull”. P recovers for dmgs realted to deathii.Reasoning: Tortfeasors takes victims as he finds him. Prox cause limits liab NOT dmgs & P’s burn was w/in scope of risk of injury. P has to prove that the consequences of breach was forseeable to the pt the human body is contacted. (like wagen. Cancer is explosion) iii.Distinction bwtn prox cause & dmgs? Wagon Mound “ unfair to hold D liable for unforeseeable injury only b/c a diff injury was 4cbleG. DAMAGES & APPORTIONMENTDAMAGES:26
We have textbook solutions for you!
The document you are viewing contains questions related to this textbook.
Sexuality Now: Embracing Diversity
The document you are viewing contains questions related to this textbook.
Chapter 16 / Exercise 3
Sexuality Now: Embracing Diversity
Carroll
Expert Verified
iv.Arg AGASINT ESR: a) fair compensation may b compensation for unforseble harms but must it? b) if P has short life expectancy anyways how does that factor in? c.Kenton v. Hyatt Hotels: Calculating dmgs. P gets comp dmgs $4 mill for skywalks collapsing at hote he was at. D challenged dmg quantity “maximum fair compens. Is $2 milli.Holding: Jury awars shouldn’t b fine tuned by cts. It stands unless D was prejudiced against. And esp. when theres evidene of dmgs. Jury was entitled to consider evidence of the scene of collapse in evaluating her physical and mental injuries for the purpose of fixing her compensationii.Reasoning: No exact formula for dmgs- just what “fairly and reasonably compensates Pfor their injuries. Take into consideration extent of injuries. Dmgs evidence: testimony, edited video scene, MD

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture