카페검색 본문
카페글 본문
-
Torts 5: Palsgraf v. Long Island R.R. 2024.07.27해당카페글 미리보기
and the complaint dismissed. Dissent. Justice Andrew believed that the issue of this case was connected with proximate cause, not negligence. He defined negligence as an act or omission which unreasonably does or may affect the rights of...
-
[Torts] 12. International Products Co. v. Erie R.R. 2024.06.28해당카페글 미리보기
liable for the plaintiff's loss due to negligence. The erroneous information provided by the defendant was the proximate cause of the plaintiff's inability to claim insurance. Even though there is no contract (no contractual relationship...
-
[Torts] Murray v. Fairbanks Morse(comparative negligence) 2024.06.26해당카페글 미리보기
금액인 2밀리언을 제시한점, 2밀리언은 유래없이 높은 금액 이라는 점, 마지막으로 머레이의 5%에 상응했던 기여과실이 proximate cause 이며 따라서 402a 의 예외가 적용 되되는 assumption of the risk 라는점, 따라서 데미지를 불 하지 않아도 됨을...
-
[Torts] 8. Murray v. Fairbanks Morse 2024.06.26해당카페글 미리보기
on appropriate handling and installation procedures, evidence of how the product was intended to be used. 4. Proximate Cause: - Argument: The manufacturer can argue that Murray’s own actions or other intervening factors were the...
-
[Torts] 6. Fletcher v. Rylands 2024.06.22해당카페글 미리보기
in Fact): The plaintiff must show that the injury would not have occurred "but for" the defendant's breach. Proximate Cause: The plaintiff must show that the injury was a foreseeable result of the defendant's actions. This limits...
-
[Torts] 5. Palsgraf v. Long Island R.R. 2024.06.20해당카페글 미리보기
to arise, the injury must be a proximate result of the defendant’s actions, and the harm must be foreseeable. Proximate cause involves determining whether the harm resulting from the negligent act was foreseeable to a reasonable person...
-
[Torts] 5.Palsgraf v. Long Island R.R. 2024.06.14해당카페글 미리보기
of Andrew. Although Justice Andrew allows a wide range of responsibility to the society, there is a limitation-the proximate cause must be closely related to the incident. In other words, the incident must have happened due to the cause...
-
[Domestic relations] 13. Wood v. McGrath, North, Mullin & Kratz, P.C 2024.06.14해당카페글 미리보기
1) the attorney’s employment (2) the attorney’s neglect of a reasonable duty (3) such negligence was the proximate cause of loss to the client. Neb.Rev.Stat. § 42-366(8) (Reissue 1993) - At the time of dissolution, the court shall...
-
[Contract II] 16. WARTZMAN v. HIGHTOWER PRODUCTIONS LTD. 2024.06.11해당카페글 미리보기
defendants neglected the duties undertaken in the employment. 3. That such negligence resulted in and was the proximate cause of loss by the plaintiff, meaning that the plaintiff was deprived of any right or parted with anything of value...
-
[Domestic Relations] Case 13 Wood v. McGrath 2024.05.31해당카페글 미리보기
2) the attorney's neglect of a reasonable duty, and (3) that such negligence resulted in and was the proximate cause of loss to the client. Koehler v. Farmers Alliance Mut. Ins. Co., 252 Neb. 712, 566 N.W.2d 750 (1997). An erroneous...