The Issue Of Contingent Liability

A) The topic concerning this case is negligence law. The issue is whether Simon would be successful perusing a negligence claim.

It could save you from buying a home with legal trouble or that has structural damage. Carefully consider buying a home that you might not be able to sell quickly in the future if you need to.

home if it were considered “underwater” and some may even have filed for bankruptcy for a

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.

The probability that liability will occur due to the litigation meets the definition of a loss contingency as stated in ASC 450. Hence:

30. Regarding a contingent liability, when no amount within a range of potential losses appears more likely

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

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

When a buyer purchases a home within an HOA, they agree to be bound by the authority of the HOA as set forth in the governing documents called the Declaration of Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions or CC&R. Based on the authority provided in these documents, HOAs establish other bylaws or rules for the community.

If you are a seller, then you will have to do many things in order to increase your chances of your home getting sold. One of the things that you can do to increase the chances of getting your home sold is to get a home warranty. It is estimated that 80 percent of potential home buyers prefer a home with a warranty.

As a result, they tend to overlook a myriad of factors that extend beyond the house, and it proves to be quite a costly mistake. While a house may boast all the features you dream of, it is important to remember that you cannot live in isolation. Therefore, you should consider other factors before committing to a sale.

A common phrase in residential real estate sales contracts is a financing contingency that allows a buyer who is not able to arrange the necessary financing within a certain period to cancel the contract and recover any earnest money paid without further obligation (Floyd, Charles, and Marcus 116)

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.

c) It is somewhat more difficult ot make judgments of contingent liabilities in general than for specific warranties because of the potential costs involved in the former. A claim for damages resulting from an oil spill such as Deepwater Horizon is an unforeseen liability, with costs that have not necessarily been planned for in terms of specific costs. Also, these damage

Turner, the terms “subject to contract” actually is a secure way to protect both of their benefit. For Mrs Turner, this means that she can pull out of the deal anytime if, for example, a survey shows up a defect or she might found another favorable property – though she can pull out for any reason. For the seller of second property, it would have allowed them to pulls out of a deal if they have had a higher offer.