Synopsis of Tort Cases Paper
Matt Howze, Kim Woodard, Anthony Fennell, Mario Hauser, Mike Anson
Mrs. Pamela Weddell
June 12, 2011
Throughout this reading, we have evaluated several scenarios and made legal decisions based on the information that we know and the information that we have learned in the previous chapters. Our goal is to determine the tort actions seen in the scenarios identify potential plaintiffs, identify potential defendants, why they are defendants, the elements of the tort claims that constitute the plaintiffs’ claims, any defenses that the defendants may assert, and how the case will be resolved with legal reasoning.
What ...view middle of the document...
The identity of potential plaintiffs
Rueben the son, Daniel the Father, Dawn the wife of Malik, and Malik the fan
The identity of potential defendants and why you see each one as a defendant
Daniel because Daniel had a concealed weapon and he shot Malik
Betty because Betty defamed Daniel
Malik yes because Malik pulled an unloaded gun at Daniel
The Stadium because Patrick was under obligation to perform a duty as an employee.
Mike because action cause distress on Reuben and Daniel when he fired Daniel.
The elements of the tort claim that constitute the plaintiff’s claim
Proximate cause is a point along a chain of events caused by a negligent party after which this party is no longer legally responsible for the consequences of his or her actions.
Actual cause of negligence is a person who commits a negligent act is not liable until actual cause can be proven.
Any defenses you think defendant might assert
Daniel may assert he was defending himself, protecting his child from distress.
Betty defense acting in the public interest in protecting the child
Malik has no true defense other than he was battered
Stadium defense had Daniel not battered malik the incident of injury would not have occurred.
Mike defense is false information resulting from the statements made by Betty.
Patrick defense is crowd unrest
How you think the claim will be resolved, stating legal reasons for your answer
Daniel will be awarded damages from the stadium because Patrick as an employee of the stadium has the duty of care to serve what Daniel ordered and he breeched his duty. Daniel will not be found guilty for shooting Malik because he was defending himself. There is a reasonable expectation that Daniel thought the Gun was loaded. Daniel will be charged and possibly convicted of Battery for pushing Malik.
Betty, any suit against Betty will be unfounded because Betty was acting in the public interest.
Malik, Malik will receive damages from the stadium being liable for its property, and Daniel battered him. Malik will be charged for assault with a deadly weapon, and distress of Reuben.
Stadium will be responsible for the damages of Malik hurting himself because the stadium property was not in good repair. Also Patrick was an employee and will be responsible for Daniel’s health related issues.
Mike, will be responsible for firing Daniel and will be required to restore Daniels job.
In this scenario, the Tort actions in this scenario consist of Intentional Torts of Assault & Battery, Defamation of Character, Disparagement, or Trade Libel & the Torts of Intentional Misrepresentation (Fraud). There is an unintentional tort of Breach of Care, Injury to Plaintiff, the Actual Cause. These are some of many torts associated here with this scenario. Franco is the first of potential plaintiffs. The news or threat of loss of his job can be cause for Emotion Distress. He and the other customers, it does not state how...