Tracy R. Klarich Case Brief

Columbia High School was using the Humanities to 1500 textbook for humanities course in 1975. In 1985, school designed the course textbook as Volume 1 of the Humanities for eleventh and twelfth grade students for optional and required readings. A portion of Lysistrata was read aloud in the class during the fall semester year. After that one of the parents objected to an English translation of the Greek dramatist Aristophanes Lysistrata and to English poet Geoffrey Miller’s. The Miller’s Tale from this textbook and the parent believed that the two works of art were too vulgar. After the parent complaint, the school board review the book and they decided to retain

Penny Ann Beernsten, a thirty-six year old small business co-owner and physical fitness instructor, went through a traumatic experience on the afternoon of July 29, 1985. She jogged at a stretch of Lake Michigan shoreline in Wisconsin. She was planning on meeting with her father at the beach at 4:00 PM and she started the jog at 3:50 PM, but was grabbed and taken to the woods where she was raped and deprived her of oxygen by suffocation until she passed out. When she woke up, she walked out of the woods, where couples comforted her until she found her husband and finally the police. (Possley).

Contributory Negligence: A court may find a plaintiff contributory negligent or partially responsible for their injuries.

Did the union violate Title I, Section 101(a) of the Landrum-Griffin Act in this case? If so, what should be the appropriate remedy?

An intentional tort case is proved by the plaintiff showing that the defendant intentionally injured him/her (1). In a negligence case, the plaintiff shows that the defendant did not act carefully as the law requires and therefore should be liable for any damages to the plaintiff (1). The strict liability cases occur when a plaintiff suffers damages even though the defendant acted carefully and with no intent of harm being done to them (1).

Torts can fall under 3 categories intentional torts, negligent torts, and strict liability. Intentional torts include intentionally

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

In the case of Nalwa v. Cedar Fair, the plaintiff fractured her wrist while riding in a Rue le Dodge bumper car at an amusement park in California. The plaintiff filed a case of negligence against the defendant. To prove negligence, the plaintiff will have to establish all of the following requirements: (1) duty of due care, breach of duty, causation, and injury. The defendant had the Rue le Dodge ride inspected yearly by state safety regulators and daily by the park’s maintenance staff. This means they filled their duty of maintaining the ride, breach of duty than does not apply or causation, but there was injury.

Ms. Glazier is a thirty-year-old Caucasian female who referred herself for Mental Health Skills Build services by due to her current struggle with mental health symptomology, domestic abuse and substance abuse. Ms. Glazier reported a history of being diagnosed with Bipolar Disorder, Schizophrenia, Posttraumatic Stress Disorder, and Obsessive Compulsive Disorder. Ms. Glazier was unable to recall when onset of her Bipolar and Schizophrenia diagnoses however, shared she has been raped over fifteen times since the age of fourteen years old and her most recent rape was in 2016. As a result of the sexual trauma Ms. Glazier reported she believes she has suppressed a lot of the memories however, verbalized the following symptoms avoidance of distressing memories (daily); avoidance of external reminders (daily); inability to remember important aspects of traumatic events (daily); markedly diminished interest in significant activities (daily); anger

There does not appear to be any definite case law on the question of whether a motion under K.S.A. 60-241(a)(2) should count as a motion to dismiss for timing purposes. The cases that I am citing are largely not considering the question on point, but instead consider it either any other contexts or in passing. Largely, any argument we make seems to need to be based in either language or the purpose of the rule.

-Working with Mary, I feel that one barrier that she is facing in regards to her expressing/accepting her sexual orientation and gender identity is fear of being rejected and shamed by her family. Evidence suggests that for LGBTQ young adults, a heightened level of

A defendant, like TEACHER, would be held liable for negligence, if the plaintiff, JENNIFER, can prove that there was a duty owed to her, that TEACHER breached that duty, the breach of that duty was the actual and proximate cause of Betty’s injuries.

Presented are four separate cases that have been argued and settled in a court of law. Each of these cases represent a different kind of tort, a tort is a civil wrong or wrongful act, which can be either intentional or accidental, from which injury occurs to another (Hill & Hill n.d.). The torts are as listed, intentional, criminal, negligence, and liability as presented in the four researched cases.

The main idea of the law of negligence is to ensure that people exercise reasonable care when they act by measuring the potential harm that may foreseeably cause harm to other people. Negligence is the principal trigger for liability to ascend in matters that deal with the loss of property of personal injury. Therefore, a person cannot be liable for something unless they have been found negligent or have contributed to the loss of property or injury to the plaintiff (Stuhmcke, 2005). There is more to

It is apparent that Steven was not paying enough attention when crossing the road on the night of the accident. Thus, Steven was, to a degree, also negligent as he did not adequately check that the road was clear. When deciding the degree of contributory negligence the courts must look at what reduction of damages pay-out is "just and equitable having regard 's to the claimant 's share in the responsibility for the damage". In order to reach a percentage of blameworthiness for each side, a broad comparison must be made of both the individual contributions from the pursuer and the defender, looking at both the causation of damage and the blameworthiness.