Assignment2TortsW24

.doc

School

Dalhousie University *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

3041

Subject

Law

Date

Feb 20, 2024

Type

doc

Pages

4

Uploaded by DoctorHeat24965

Report
Drop box Assignment #2 Torts LAWS 3041 W24 Student Name: Student ID: 1. View the following video: Warning may disturb some viewers  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MJgPgtsP1iY Patrice Cormier was formerly charged by the police with assault. 1a.In a civil court if Tam Sued Cormier - what would the tort be? Answer: battery or negligence 1b. What would Cormier’s best defense in a civil court be? Answer: battery – unintentional Negligence – volenti non fit injuria – voluntary assumption of risking – part of the game he consented to the hit 2. View the following: In this video you will see the Bertuzzi- Moore hit. In the same video, you will see the previous Moore hit on Bertuzzi’s teammate Markus Nasland, one of the league’s highest scorer’s at the time. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKFFc1NsdYE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GEjdwlT6g7o
Moore filed a lawsuit seeking $15 million in lost wages, $1 million in aggravated damages and another $2 million in punitive damages from Bertuzzi. (Now amended and he is suing for $41.5 million ($35 million is estimated in lost wages) Moore's parents are also claiming $1.5 million in damages for "the nervous shock and mental distress'' caused by the attack. Using the following website: http://www.canlii.org/ Search Bertuzzi under case name: 2. Look up Moore v. Bertuzzi, 2008 CanLII 3228 (ON S.C.). 2a. Who are the defendants named other than Bertuzzi and on what basis is Moore suing these defendants. Hint – paragraph 2, Answer: ORCA BAY HOCKEY LIMITED PARTNERSHIP and ORCA BAY HOCKEY, INC. dba THE VANCOUVER CANUCKS HOCKEY CLUB   On the basis of Vicarious liability – he is an employee of the team 2b. Why did they amend their original claim Hint 2 a-d: Answer: (a)                             Comments allegedly made by then Canuck president and general manager Brian Burke and then head coach Marc Crawford following the February 16, 2004 game expressing dissatisfaction with Moore’s hit on Naslund and the failure of the referees to call a penalty, which the plaintiffs refer to as a “calling out” and which they define as a challenge or inducement to the Canucks players to take retaliatory action and effect “payback” against Moore; (b)                             Concerns expressed by NHL vice president Colin Campbell to David Nonis, then Canuck senior vice president and director of hockey operations, about threats made by Canucks players toward Moore and anticipated retaliation;
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help