Respondents V. African Summary

Africa, like many other continents, was a very tremendous and a very diverse civilization that is very complicated to introduce due to all its wonderful but also diverse features and beliefs. From the differences between its society and language to its religion and politics, Africa always had the reputation that its empires, cities, and kingdoms never progressed in the developments and achievements for their civilization. Many people believed that the Europeans were actually the cause of Africa’s achievements and advanced developments for their civilizations. However, this is further than the whole truth. Before the arrival of the Europeans between the 15th and 16th century, African kingdoms, empires, and cities had many achievements and accomplishments

The Plaintiff, Keller, sued the defendant, DeLong. DeLong was driving Kellers car at Tyngsboro, Massachusetts at approximately 11:40p.m. on April 14, 1963, DeLong collided with a utility pole at the side of the highway. The Trial Court ruled that the sole cause of the accident was the fact that the defendant dozed off to sleep and did not awaken in time to avoid collision with the pole. The driver showed no sign he was going to fall asleep. Defendant, Carl DeLong, suddenly and unexpectedly dozed at the time of the occurrence of the accident. Defendant, DeLong, was not found negligent. Vacated; reversed, affirming trial court’s judgment.

Application/Analysis: The court agrees that the state has a legitimate interest in protecting its citizens from fraud, but in this instance, the court takes issue with the fact that a sole authority, the secretary of the Public Welfare Council, can decide what is considered a valid religion. The court states that the secretary “is empowered to determine whether the cause is a

In the district court trial, the jury sided with the plaintiff and ruled that the St. Louis Hockey Club was vicariously liable for the plaintiff’s injuries. The trial court agreed with the plaintiff’s argument that as per the doctrine of respondeat superior, the defendant was liable for their employee’s negligent actions that led to the plaintiff’s injuries. As part of their

Had he been wearing the safety belt, he would not have been killed. The second defense that Ford Motor Company has is that the purpose of a car is to drive it and not to crash a car so that it spun. Since, the door flew open during a spin, Ford Motor Company was not liable for the death of Chancit. The normal use of a car is not to send it into a spin. The third defense that Ford Motor Company has is that Chancit was suffering from food poisoning and was unwell, that was why he was thrown out of the car. The fourth defense is that the car is meant for normal driving. The safety measures in the car were adequate for normal driving. Since, Chancit was driving in a closed lane and possibly at a speed that was higher than that permitted, Ford Motor Company was no liable. III. The City of Los Angeles is liable of negligence. The sign board it placed said Left lane closed ahead, whereas, it was Right lane closed ahead. The City of Los Angeles had a duty of care to ensure that it placed the correct signs so that motorists were not misguided. There was a breach of duty because the City of Los Angeles placed the wrong sign and this misguided Chancit into an accident. There was direct cause between the placement of the wrong sign and the accident that killed Chancit. There was legal causation. Chancit suffered harm because he was killed. In other words, the City of Los Angeles is guilty of negligence. The court will rule in favor of Chancit and award his widow

Vicarious liability is a form of strict, secondary liability that arises under the common law doctrine of agency, respondeat superior, the responsibility of the superior for the acts of their subordinate or the responsibility of any third party that had the ability or duty to control the activities of a violator. Employers are vicariously liable for the torts of their employees that are committed during the course of employment. Employers will only be liable for the torts of their employees. They will not usually be liable for the torts of their independent contractors. It is therefore necessary to establish the status of the tortfeasor (Law Teacher 2012).

In Pennsylvania, a plaintiff claiming negligent infliction of emotional distress must establish one of these four situations: “1) that the defendant had a contractual or fiduciary duty; 2) plaintiff suffered a physical impact; 3) plaintiff was in a “zone of danger” and at risk of an immediate physical injury; or 4) plaintiff had a contemporaneous perception of tortious injury to a close relative.” Doe v. Phila. Cmty. Health Alternatives AIDS Task Force, 754 A.2d 25, 27 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2000). The first element does not apply to our client because there was no fiduciary or contractual duty relationship. Secondly, it could be argued that Nordlund suffered a physical impact because after Sumner’s accident, Nordlund could not eat, could not

Ronnie was the primary victim as he was placed in physical danger whilst in the truck and suffered psychiatric harm as a result. For this sole reason, he is owed a duty of care by his employers. The nature of their relationship means . Failure to install a new safety screen equates to the company's failure to meet the standard of care and they are liable for breach. Ronnie's refusal to wear a helmet is an example of negligent contribution and the two requirements of this principle are satisfied: Ronnie did not take proper care for his own safety and said failure was contributory to the damage he suffered. This is similar to the Capps v Miller case of 1989, where the claimant did not fasten his helmet, subsequently suffering from serious head injuries. Contributory negligence operates as a defence for Bricks R Us, however it is only partial to avoid absolution of liability, since the court's primary aim is to compensate the

This case is a very sensitive situation since it pertains to a pastor in the Christian Church. I chose this particular case since I am also an active member in the Christian community. This pastor who had been accused of having sexual relations with four women in his congregation was convicted of four counts of sexual exploitation by a counselor or therapist and one count of a pattern or practice to engage in sexual exploitation by a counselor or therapist (STATE of Iowa, Appellee, v. Patrick EDOUARD, Appellant. No. 12-1899).

In 1983 & 1984, Galen Black and Al Smith lost their jobs for violating ADAPT’s (Alcohol and Drug Abuse Prevention and Treatment) abstinence-only policy. They used the drug peyote as part of their religious ceremonies as members of the Native American Church. They filed a claim for unemployment benefits, but they were denied because the reason for their dismissal was viewed as work-related misconduct (2/8). They filed a lawsuit saying this denial violated their First Amendment rights (8). Smith and his lawyer maintained that the state had no compelling interest strong enough to override the right of members of the Native American Church to practice religion. The state initially argued that its compelling interest lay in protecting the integrity

In case #1, Helen Happy could pursue court action, because of the situation she was in during her encounter with Zeb Zuggins. In Business Law in Canada, written by Richard A. Yates, Teresa Bereznicki-Korol, and Trevor Clarke, a tort is committed when, “one person causes injury to another, harming his or her person, property or reputation (p.99). For Helen Happy, who has suffered both physical and psychological injuries, the tort law can help her obtain compensation and punish the defendant, Zeb Zuggins for his wrongful behaviour. As the plaintiff, who suffered a number of losses after the incident, she could argue trespass to person, specifically battery, after Zeb pushed her to the passenger’s seat, punched her, and threw her out of the car. In order to prove battery in a court room, the action must be unwanted, intentional and involve physical contact. Furthermore, in this case, it can be argued that Ike Inkster’s carelessness provided Zeb with the opportunity to escape the van because Ike’s co-worker was left with an unrestrained inmate, while Ike left to check upon the accident in front of them. Since Ike and Melvin were working during business hours, the tort occurred while they were on shift, and Helen Happy could hold the Alberta Correctional Services potentially liable for the incident that happened on January 26th, 2013. According to (Yates et al. 2013), in Business Law in Canada, a business can be vicariously liable for the actions of an employee during employment

If the negative attitude that the whites hold against the African Americans does not change, then the demographic trends that place the African Americans at the bottom of the social class hierarchy will not change any time soon. The other thing that could reduce the segregation and the discrimination the African Americans in the United States face is increasing the currently scarce resources. This will enable the African Americans to rise to the middle class as the rest of the white population. The demographic trends could also change for the better if more and more African Americans intermarried with people from different races. This way discrimination, prejudice, and segregation against them would slowly lose their credibility thus making it possible for the African Americans to rise along the social ladder. However, if these changes do not take place, then, the historic demographic trends are prone to remain the same.

Between the years 1450-1750, there were great changes in what we know today as the American Continent. The Europeans in their explorations found what they called the new world. They were impressed by the beautiful and fertile lands they had in front of their eyes, a land full of opportunities. The documentary: Africans in America; talks about the beginnings of English colonization in North America and how the terrible transformation of the situation of Africans in these new lands occurred. It presents the reality of a shamefully cruel history of humanity. It makes us see how this wonderful country is founded on bloodshed, slavery, inequality of rights, and inhuman acts.

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

It can be concluded that Mr. Prendergast was acting negligently whilst driving his car, above the national speed limit, as confirmed by his insurers. Therefore Contributory Negligence is the basic issue to be consulted with the insurers who are claiming that Steven’s claim ought to be ‘substantially reduced’ due to the negligence on his behalf.