10

Based solely on what you've described, what the lawyer did is inappropriate if, in fact, it occurred without any prior permissions. However, since you are not the actual client, it may be that you lack pertinent info, because this would be exceedingly rare behavior. Lawyers are allowed to make procedural and "expert"/professional decisions about your case ...


9

Lawyers have two primary ethical duties: to the client, and to the legal system. I'm not going to tell you whether your lawyer was right in your case, because I don't know the specifics of your case. However, there are some decisions that are the lawyer's to make, even if the client disagrees. The allocation of responsibility, in most jurisdictions, is ...


8

You don't specify what country's law you're interested in, but as you mention precedent, I'll assume you're interested in common-law jurisdictions such as the United States. The short answer is: you won't find any successful lawsuits such as you describe, at least not without some significant additional facts. In order to be subject to liability, a person ...


7

The burden for proving claims in civil actions is "preponderance of evidence," i.e., merely that "more than 50% of the evidence favors a conclusion." However, the standard for conviction of any crime is "beyond a reasonable doubt." I.e., if the defense can raise reasonable doubt about one's guilt then the defendant should be acquitted. There is quite a ...


7

First of all, the USA's legal system is not here to be referee to every single little "gotcha" mistake, and every little mistake doesn't mean a payday for someone. The employee at the tax preparer screwed up. They mixed up your folder with the other guy's folder. It was an honest mistake, which is another way of saying "nobody stands to gain from this." ...


6

First of all, you can't "sue yourself." In this case, the estate of the husband is suing the wife. Apparently the wife is trying to manipulate insurance into paying her for accidentally killing her husband through her own negligence. That is really shameless, assuming she's to benefit. That said, you can admit to negligence and not expose yourself to ...


5

To win a negligence claim, the plaintiff needs to prove that the defendant: had a duty to the plaintiff, breached that duty by failing to conform to the required standard of conduct (generally the standard of a reasonable person), the plaintiff must have suffered actual harm, the negligent conduct was, in law, the cause of that harm, and that harm was ...


5

One of the biggest problems here is in proof of injury attributable to an individual... With asbestos, you can prove that direct exposure in a certain instance caused a long-term harm. Just because you were around asbestos doesn't mean you get lung cancer, so if you don't actually suffer any harm (or any harm yet), you won't get awarded damages. Similarly ...


5

In the U.S are judges, attorneys, physicians, teachers, professors, politicians, administrative officers liable for ordinary negligence? In the U.S., judges, prosecuting attorneys and legislators have absolute immunity from civil liability (but not from criminal liability) for legislative and judicial acts in their official capacity. Attorneys have ...


5

On the one hand, there are statutes that prohibit the delivery of instructions which distort or circumvent the official/intended use or safety of a device. For a somewhat related example of this, see MCL 750.540c(1)(3). On the other hand, the company/manufacturer is unlikely to prevail under contract law no matter how clearly and conspicuously its EULA ...


4

When it is a mistake of memory, and not intentional (as this question is asking), there are no clear standards, and it is largely up to prosecutorial discretion. This means that whatever factors affect prosecutorial discretion (such as the prosecutor knowing who they have to work with on other days) can become significant in the determination. A ...


4

I don't think that simply failing to make a sufficient explanation of the risks would make a death manslaughter. Three would have to have been serious negligence in addition, rather beyond the level needed to find malpractice, as I understand the matter. Law.com says that: Voluntary manslaughter includes killing in heat of passion or while committing a ...


4

You certainly can claim whatever you want. Will you be granted it though? Time is money indeed, and replacing the damaged items requires some time not just items themselves. The question is how much time and at what rate? Your duty will be to mitigate the damages and so to minimise the time and its cost. Will your normal hourly rate be applicable? Only if ...


3

There are many factors that determine whether charges are brought (not just for negligent homicide). One pertains to jurisdiction: if there is a difference in the statutes of two states, you will get different likelihoods of prosecution. The second pertains to prevailing case law, that is, how the courts interpret the words of a statute. The third is the ...


3

Abandonment is not the legal concept to be concerned with (though the situation might fall within the ambit of a law that uses the word "abandon"), instead the question should be about the legal obligations of a parent. California Family Code is what you want to look at. Though a look at the criminal act of "child abandonment" can be informative: section 271 ...


3

Sources of Liability Liability can come from: Statute law Contract law Common law Statute Law There may be (almost certainly are) laws in the jurisdiction where Joes Cheap Carnival are operating relating to Work Health and Safety. In general, these laws will impose a non-delegable duty (i.e. one you cant get out of) to comply with certain minimum ...


3

Barring any specific statute the relevant law is the tort of negligence. To succeed Alice must prove Bob: had a duty to Alice, breached that duty by failing to conform to the required standard of conduct (generally the standard of a reasonable person), the negligent conduct was, in law, the cause of the harm to Alice, and Alice was, in fact, harmed or ...


3

Criminal negligence pertains to criminal acts, which are prosecuted by the government and where a defendant can be convicted and punished. There will be a statute explaining where "criminal negligence" is relevant and when it is applicable. Here is the section in Washington law about criminal negligence: A person is criminally negligent or acts with ...


3

What’s the problem? Most likely the situation is 100% sure that he or she wouldn’t have performed the operation without anaesthesia. Therefore anaesthesia was not something his brain needed to remember, therefore it didn’t. He gave a truthful answer. He has no memory of it. He doesn’t need a memory of it, he just needed to make sure it’s done. Do you have ...


3

Note: the example is distracting because it is so unrealistic. The surgeon does not put the patient under anesthesia, the anesthesiologist does. In a malpractice case, the plaintiff would have records which include what type of anesthesia was used, etc. In any case, your question seems to be about establishing negligence in a medical malpractice case. The ...


2

The best answer for the whole solution (not only code) is: it strictly depends on country. As for strictly the software, it's easy to drop any potential responsibility. Look at the MIT license: The software is provided "as is", without warranty of any kind, express or implied, including but not limited to the warranties of merchantability, fitness ...


2

Negligence Liability for negligence relies on the existence of a duty to do something (or to not do something). The plaintiff must suffer some injury as a result of a breach of that duty. Damages will be awarded to remedy that injury. Does Apple have a duty to provide software and hardware functionality to maximise the life of the batteries included with ...


2

Canada has inherited the English common law, which allows you to sue for damages if a tort has been committed. I will focus on that, without considering the various other legal consequences of a wrongful prosecution (eg. criminal perjury charges, disciplinary action against police or prosecutors, ex gratia payments, or statutory remedies in Canadian ...


2

In Canada, could you sue that person? No. Perjury is a crime but unlike most crimes there is no corresponding civil tort under which you can seek damages. the police failed to uncover inconsistencies that would have impugned the credibility of that witness This is not the job of the police. A criminal trial is conducted between the prosecution (...


2

Hmm... your question is confusing, but there are a few misunderstandings I'd like to first address: You can't sue over criminal matters You can only sue for damages generally. If you got hurt due to the action of someone else, then you can sue them for damages. Example: a dog owner let's his dog free in a park without a leash, and the dog knocks you over, ...


2

Am I required to provide such an alarm/notification system to employees and/or other persons who are on the property where my business is located? Yes, by Federal Law. As well as many state and local laws. The best places to start are http://www.firemarshal.alabama.gov/ and https://www.osha.gov/law-regs.html Does having received or having not ...


2

Under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, "Every State shall require the master of a ship flying its flag, in so far as he can do so without serious danger to the ship, the crew or the passengers to render assistance to any person found at sea in danger of being lost, to proceed with all possible speed to the rescue of persons in ...


2

The judgement actually gives reasons: The criminal law insists that every person driving a car must attain an objective standard measured by a skilled, experienced and careful driver. That is shown by McCrone v Riding ... the standard is an objective standard, impersonal and universal, fixed in relation to the safety of other users of the ...


2

It is generic negligence. In most United States jurisdictions, Negligence is a tort requiring (1) duty, (2) breach of that duty, (3) but-for and proximate causation, and (4) harm. In most human interaction, one person has a duty to act as a reasonable person to avoid harming another person. So if you do something a reasonable person would not do, and that ...


2

The tree example is so common in Pennsylvania that the legal principles are common knowledge here: If a tree falls nobody can be blamed for its damage unless prior, credible notice was given. I.e., the only way I can be held liable for the damage of a tree rooted on my property is if it is either obviously a hazard (e.g., already broken or falling) or else ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible