Key Similarities and Differences Between Roman Delict and Common Law Tort

Throughout our class we have been learning to tie difference civilizations and their cultures together that seemed to be very different. We have seen may different civilizations with some of the same qualities that existed many years apart from each-other. Such as the Art of War which was written in the 5th century and the Law Code of Hammurabi that was written in 1772 B.C.E but they both can be compared to the Magna Carta with its views of kingship.

The Roman Empire was a marvelous civilization stretching from the far ends of the Mediterranean Sea to the nutrient rich soils of the Fertile Crescent and all the way north to what is now known as the United Kingdom. In fact, the empire was so expansive that there was a need for organized law; and so with each emperor there came new constitutions and decrees for the Roman people to follow. The Theodosian Code was just one of the many juristic materials that helped define Roman law and keep legal clarity until the fall of the Byzantine Empire in 1453 C.E.1This paper will define the contents of The Theodosian Code; show how the size and organization of the Roman Empire had an effect on the document; and examine how religion had influenced

Greece influenced roman societies and modern day societies politically as explained in documents 1, 2, 4, and 6. Greece was the first ancient civilization to have a democracy. The basic rule for roman society law system was displayed in the twelve tables. (Doc 2) Many western civilizations adapted this law system as well as other ideas from the roman 12 tables which influenced western societies immensely. The document explains a quote that we still use in modern society which is “every man is innocent until proven guilty.” Octavian Augustus states that after he dies “the foundations which I have laid for its future government will stand firm and stable” the Greeks invented an idea of a ruling senate which today is known as democracy. (Doc 4)

By around 500 BC, the new idea of citizenship began to take shape. The people of an empire were no longer referred to as subjects, but as citizens. These people were given certain rights, but along with these rights came responsibilities as well. Although both the Romans and Athenians had citizens, they had different outlooks on what an individual’s right and responsibilities were. Athens’ system for citizenship was better than that of Rome’s because all citizens were given equal right, their government was built by the poor, they protected their democracy.

Rome is a beautiful place, with lots of history. Rome and the U.S. weare different in law, religion,and activities.They are similar to each other, but they’re nothing alike at the same time.

The distinctive body of law which is now referred to as tort arouse in the 1580’s with the first usage of the word ‘tort’ in a legal context. The general creation of ‘tort’ in a court of law was made to allow a party that has suffered harm due to the inactions or actions caused by an opposing party to impeach legal liability to the opposing party or to allow the accused party the right to defend their liability of such harms. The primary purpose of tort law Is to redress imbalances which has led to harm caused by another party this allows aggrieved parties to have the right and freedom to seek compensation for such damages as a court of law sees fit. Tort has a large distinction from other areas of law as crimes are punishable by the state, whereas as for a tort has specific consequences and allows the injured person or party the right to action. Tort’s largest outlying factor which differentiate from other areas of the law is the fact that for other areas of the law the case will classify the pursuant to their seriousness and in regards to tort this would not be the case due to the case will be decided in regards to a party’s legal liability and that the injured party receives right and just compensation for their losses.

Clarify the differences and similarities of traditional negligence theory and res ipsa loquitur. Be sure to include at least two examples of each not discussed in the book.

Historically, the transferred intent doctrine has been applied to five intentional torts. The five torts are battery, assault, false imprisonment, trespass to chattel, and trespass to land. Under transferred intent, if the defendant intends any of these five torts, but her acts, instead or in addition, result in any of the other five intentional torts, the defendant is liable, even though she did not intend the other tort. The transferred intent rule may have emerged because these five torts were historically associated with a single action for trespass. The concept of trespass was not limited to the contemporary meaning of trespass to land, but embodied many types of direct injuries. It is important, consequently, Torts, is a large area of private law concerned with compensating those who have been injured by the wrongdoing of others to recognize that courts have applied the concept only to these five intentional torts. The law of torts is mainly judge-made law; courts over the centuries have defined people 's rights and obligations with respect to their fellows. These are constantly in flux and change to meet new technological and social concerns. The example for our case would be the case law of Donoghue v. Stevenson. This is one of the most important cases in English tort law history. The judges determined that each citizen has a duty of care for his or her fellow citizens where it is

Among all of the famous writings originating from Rome, Cicero’s oratory is the most analyzed and admired by translators. Cicero, who held power to what is similar to a judge, was defending Caelius Rufus. Caelius, who was a past student of Cicero, was charged with political violence. The trial is mostly focusing on Caelius for taking gold for the attempted murder of Dio of Alexandria as well as poisoning a woman named Clodia. Cicero made an effective introduction about Caelius to show that he is not guilty of these charges. Hence,  the trial begins on a high note for Caelius.

As a starting note, any mention of concurrent liability should be assumed to mean concurrently liability in tort and contract. Traditionally the distinction between contract and tort was that contract concerns the improvement of the claimant 's position, whereas tort is concerned with dealing with their position worsening. There has been dispute around concurrent liability and its ambiguity has led to varying decision in cases and statute making as Taylor puts it “the basis of concurrent liability uncertain”. This essay will argue Tort has and is extending itself beyond its traditional role due to judges presumption of morality leading to the unclear concurrent liability we see today. Whilst this concurrent liability shows some

•"Similarities and Differences between the Roman Empire and The United States of America." Similarities and Differences between the Roman Empire and The United States of America. N.p., n.d. Web. 18 Oct. 2016.

Murder, under common law, is the unlawful killing of another person in existence with malice aforethought (Bower, 2014). In other words, an individual had to have a clear criminal intent with some amount of spite, hate, or bad will to commit the killing before the murder occurred and had to be planned in advance (Samaha, 2013). To illustrate, during the 1550’s, English homicide statutes outlined activities such as poisoning or lying in wait as examples of preplanned murders. However, while murder was initially only thought of as an intentional and premeditated act, over time judges saw the need to develop new classifications of murders that didn’t fit the standard definition.

1. In pari delicto both parties are equally guilty. It’s used in reference to a transaction as to which relief will not be granted to either party because both are equally guilty of wrongdoing. Moreover, because both parties are equally to blame, the court will side with neither party.

A) Distinguish between the terms actus reus and mens rea. How are they significant in criminal law?

Justice has been misperceived to go hand and hand with rules in which a society must conform to, mostly in due part to the enlightenment era. In the case with the Romans, the laws they established, especially early on, dealing with the spread of Christianity has been interpreted with a sense of disgust for the unfair treatment targeted towards Christians, and later on to those of other faiths. However, I argue that, Roman law, when concerning religion, was used to strengthen the identity of what it meant to be Roman. Furthermore, as Rome, the political institution, was beginning to decay, as an act of acclamation, the formulation of Roman Laws allowed Christianity to be a main means of connection to what it meant to identify as Roman. Utilizing various primary sources, it is evident that faith had been gradually accepted as the dominant form of unity and law, beginning with Emperor Diocletian to Emperor Theodosia, even among emperors, the Catholic faith had shown that all men were under God, and under God they were all Roman.