Mercyhurst University Student Liability Study

The case study selected for week three centers on a liability and assumption of risk case study. In this case study, Brent Thomas and George Banks are facing liability charges after Ricky Watts sustained a serious injury during hockey practice (Essex, 2016). In this situation, Thomas is the school principal, and Banks is the hockey coach as well as the gym teacher (Essex, 2016). Ricky obtained injuries after improperly blocking the puck (Essex, 2016). This case study was selected because it highlights a situation that will likely be faced by all future school leaders. Sports are popular among students, and there is inherent risk in each sporting event. A school is open to liability if they do not ensure that proper protocols are met.

There are three theories of liability direct, vicarious, and enterprise. Direct liability has four types that are direct one of which is the principle in the 1st degree aka "the Perpetrator" which is someone who committed the crime willing on his own accord. The second is the principle in the 2nd degree aka "the Accomplice" which is someone who assisted the assailant with the delegation of the crime while also wanting to commit the crime at the same time he/she is also present during the scene of the crime. An accessory before the Fact is not present in the area of where the crime was committed, but helped by either counseling, encouraging, or urging the delegation of a crime. The Pinkerton Rule states that all accessories are liable for predictable actions that lead to being criminalized hence the violation of the criminal agreement. Even if the accomplice is not present at the scene of a committed felony crime they are still guilty. The two aspects are the specific resolve towards committing the crime the aiding of crime or encouragement towards the committing of a crime. A death penalty is only ever enforced on those who have committed the murder. The next type is the accessory after the fact which is someone who knows he/she has committed a crime and still aid with disturbing the case like hiding the assailant away from the police for example. They will also be charged with the felony since they know they committed the crime. Relations like with family is a type of

Both the youth and adult chaperones gained friendships and a greater understanding of each other and the world at large. Youth were able to practice life skills such as taking responsibility for oneself and building relationships with others different from you. As a result of this program, youth from Kanawha County participated as campers with the Wayne County 4-H Older Camp. The collaborative spirit among the Extension Educators was unparalleled. All involved recommended that these educational experiences continue in the

Intentional torts often occur in sports, recreation and even sorority and fraternities. Some intentional torts are assault, battery, and hazing just to name a few. It doesn’t matter what type of sporting event there is also a change someone can be charged if in the wrong. The purpose of this assignment is to compare three different case studies as it relates to intentional tort. The first case study is Karas v. Strevell (2008), followed by Deng v. Baruch College (2013), and the bounty scandal with the New Orleans Saints football team (2009).

In participating from this wonderful opportunity, I hope to gain a lot of experience from this trip, learning about the history of the school, and having a lot of fun while learning about the school. I also wish to be able to gain more wisdom from this opportunity that I have been presented with. This is will be a great learning experience for me, especially to learn about the history of the school I am

To create prosperous Professional medical negligence claims, you can find 2 biggest aspects ought to prove. To start with, you must show in which problem from professional medical website, i. Electronic. Treatment is exhibiting ended up being poor along with executed under many appropriate prices and that has not been helped simply by physique. Second of all you have got to demonstrate causation means carelessness treatment right added to the damage.

Did Lennie cause the first officer's death? Distinguish between proximate cause and cause in fact. Are there any intervening causes? If so, are they superseding? Explain in detail every argument that could help Lennie and every argument that the prosecution is likely to use against him using only the concepts you learned in class.

Mecca is a 15 year old male who is before the court on the above charges. Mecca resides with his legal guardian, Ms. Sara McAllister. She reported he was removed from the home of his mother, Alicia Gaither and placed in the care of the Norfolk Department of Social Services (NDSS) around three years ago. She further said that Mecca was placed in NDSS custody due to his mother stating she would place her children in a car and drive it into the ocean. She was intoxicated at the time according to Ms. McAllister. She also reported Mecca was placed with another family member and eventually placed back with his mother. Ms. McAllister reported around March 2016, she was awarded Mecca’s custody.

Also they would have to set aside the time for meetings service projects and outdoor activities which would include camping trips and hiking over the weekends. During this trip our students may become injured they may receive cuts, scrapes, and broken

This week's question concerns liability and moral responsibility in consumer products. As the question is multi-part, the answer will be likewise. To begin, the first question addresses who should be liable for the voluntary actions of others. Specifically, if substantial information concerning the hazards of a product or service has been offered to the consumer, who is to blame if someone is injured? Similar to most questions derived from this course, the answer is "it depends."

Torts of negligence are breaches of duty that results to injury to another person to whom the duty breached is owed. Like all other torts, the requirements for this are duty, breach of duty by the defendant, causation and injury(Stuhmcke and Corporation.E 2001). However, this form of tort differs from intentional tort as regards the manner the duty is breached. In torts of negligence, duties are breached by negligence and not by intent. Negligence is conduct that falls below the standard of care established by law for the protection of others against unreasonable risk of harm(Stuhmcke and Corporation.E 2001). The standard measure of negligence is the universal reasonable person standard. The assumption in this case is that a reasonable

Try to contact a personal injury lawyer to help you get the claim since the commercial truck was at fault, damaged your car and caused you back and shoulder pain. If the lawyer can really prove that the accident is caused by the negligence of the truck driver, then you are legally entitled to receive compensation and damages.

A person should be held personally liable for an incident taking place on their property, but not criminally responsible in many different cases. This is because a person might not mean to cause harm to a person. A person should also be personally liable when they cause an accident indirectly. An example is if a person hurts themselves by falling down the stairs in your home because of a broken step. You are personally liable because your past actions had an effect on the accident (ex. not having fixed the stairs in the past), but not criminally responsible since you did not directly cause the

Contingent Liability is a condition that refers to the possibility of a future event happening and addresses the responsibility of the party liable should the event take place. In today’s real estate market both sellers and buyers may have contingencies stated in the terms and conditions for selling and purchasing a home. The most common contingent liability are guarantees to debt.

This paper will be discussing the concept of strict liability along with the concept of absolute liability within the R. v. Sault Ste. Marie (1978). In doing so, this paper will explain how strict liability offences strike a good balance between the policy rationales for absolute liability in regulatory offences and the criminal law principle that only the morally blameworthy may be punished, and how the courts have interpreted absolute liability offence and their relationship with the Charter of Rights.