38
Litigation Costs v. Liability Insurance Cost
It is worth noting that what the Institute for Legal Reform, a tort reform lobbying group, is stating, is not that the U.S. has "higher litigation cost" than other countries. They are financed mostly by businesses that have to pay liability insurance expenses and are motivated in their analysis to come ...
26
The tort for this kind of activity is called public disclosure of private facts, and almost every U.S. state recognizes that this tort is invalid under the First Amendment in the absence of a legal duty not to disclose of the type existing between an attorney and client, or a psychotherapist and a patient, or a contractual non-disclosure agreement, that does ...
11
Probably not.
Overview
You haven't specified a jurisdiction. I will talk about Australia because that's what I'm familiar with.
In Australia the most relevant area of law would be tort, specifically negligence. The university would be liable to pay damages if a court found that it owed a duty of care to your friend, that it breached that duty, and that ...
10
I know nothing about the law.
What I have heard from others (that also know nothing) is that in some countries/states it might be illegal to record audio/video without the recording party being present. The exact location (public/private/bedroom/bathroom) of the recording might also make a difference.
(for example)
Illegal: Someone hides a running ...
9
To use Texas as an example:
Sec. 22.01. ASSAULT. (a) A person commits an offense if the person:
(1) intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly causes bodily injury to another, including the person's spouse;
(2) intentionally or knowingly threatens another with imminent bodily injury, including the person's spouse; or
(3) intentionally ...
8
There's always civil action possible; "assault and battery" has a civil variant as an "intentional tort"
Civil assault and battery are torts. A tort is a wrong committed by one person against another, causing damage. Specifically, civil assault and battery are intentional torts. [...]
Intentional torts are torts that are committed on ...
7
Yes.
It is a crime almost everywhere to throw something at someone, even if it causes little or no injury. Usually it would be classified as "assault and battery" although if it damages clothing or other property, it could also be called, for example, "criminal mischief" which is intentional damage to property.
It would also be a tort that could be ...
6
This has been a long-considered matter. Under common law, unwanted incidental touching - say, in the context of a public space - is not illegal per se.
In Cole v. Turner (1704) 87 ER 907, Holt CJ said that:
First, the least touching of another in anger is a battery.
Secondly, if two or more meet in a narrow passage, and without any violence or design ...
6
You would need to be able to prove that he encroached on your land (or your tenancy to land) with his pesticide/herbicide. You should speak to him and let him know that you feel his herbicide made its way (it could've come with the wind if its just on the borders) to the land, and as a result your animals were harmed. It's always better to see if you can ...
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
Short answer
The general approach and attitude that you propose is a horrible one that would bring an unfavorable result. It would add many months or years to the time when the case would mostly likely be resolved and would reduce the economic value of your case by a substantial percentage, perhaps cutting it in half or more.
Your instincts towards the ...
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
Generally speaking, under US law, the victim or alleged victim of a crime cannot force a prosecution. Police and prosecutors have wide discretion on which crimes to prosecute. Even if it is clear that a crime has been committed, there is usually no right to have police or court action. If officials think that the public interest (or their own interests) ...
4
(My expectation is that the proof has to be replicated and the
conviction cannot be introduced as evidence).
Your expectation is incorrect.
The name of the legal doctrine that allows a criminal judgment to have this effect in a civil case is called "collateral estoppel" which is also sometimes called "issue preclusion". See, e.g., A-1 Auto Repair & ...
4
I'm sorry that you've had to go through this. Car accidents are rough business (having been through two, I know how bad they can be!).
As others in this thread have pointed out, Utah is a no-fault state. Legislators intended for this to cut down on court costs and unburden the legal system. Drivers just turn to their insurance companies and have their ...
4
"No fault" is a term of art in this case. In a "no fault" insurance regime, such as the one in place in Utah, minor car accidents are covered by the insurance company of the person who suffers the damage, and not by the person who is at fault in the accident.
Utah's "No-Fault" Insurance System
Utah is a "no-fault" car insurance state. This means that ...
4
Who Is On The Risk?
This depends upon the language of the respective Gecko and NoState policies, the liability of each insurer is determined independently, and it is possible that neither, one or both of them would be "on the risk" as they say in the industry.
Usually, insurance policies are drafted on either an "occurrence" basis (i.e. when the "incident" ...
4
The Liability Insurance Crisis
There was absolutely an increase in liability insurance premiums in the 1980s, although the cause of the liability insurance crisis in the 1980s remains disputed.
During the period from 1984 to 1987, premiums for general liability
increased from about $6.5 billion to approximately $19.5 billion.2
In addition to ...
4
The US Supreme Court only has jurisdiction in federal matters. So if someone is suing under federal law, or there is a constitutional question, the Supreme Court is the place to go for a definitive answer.
However, states have their own laws. The Supreme Court cannot tell New York that it must apply the attractive nuisance doctrine, as it is neither a ...
4
Sure, you can sue; but who are you going to sue? You have to prove someone knew about the fact that one condo resident was going to be paying for the other condo's hot water.
Mixed up plumbing and electrical systems are fairly common in apartment and condo complexes, especially ones that have been converted. Chances are high it's a mistake and was not done ...
4
Probably not.
It appears that in the case in question, your lawyers, while they were representing you, agreed to a protective order that kept certain information including settlement offers made to them by the opposing parties' lawyers (even if those offers were rejected) confidential.
You are bound by the agreements made by your lawyers if they are your ...
4
If the accident was your fault, the person harmed by the accident has a right to sue you for the amount of damages incurred, and will prevail if they can prove your fault and their damages in court.
You don't have to settle the case at all. You could simply wait for them to sue you, although doing so would result in a claim against your car insurance policy ...
4
All torts have to be proved.
In 99.99% of cases the proof is by admission of the tortfeaser.
That is, they agree to pay damages with or without admission of liability.
Where liability is contested, there are never any “slam dunks”. There are strong cases, even very strong cases, but when someone else is deciding the case, there are no certainties. ...
4
They have the same standard of proof but different onus
The legal system places the onus of proving an allegation on the person making the allegation. For your example, this is A if they are suing B or the government prosecutor if B is being prosecuted.
The standard of proof is “beyond reasonable doubt” if B is defending a criminal prosecution and “balance ...
4
No. Twitter is traditionally a platform, not a distributor or a publisher. Blocking linking is not editorializing like in a publisher.
They don't act as an editor in mounting warnings or deleting posts, they enforce their rights under the Communications Decency Act, Section 230 (emphasis mine):
No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be ...
4
Start with the premise that Person A has so far engaged only in speech, which is presumptively protected by the First Amendment. So unless the speech is for some reason unprotected, the police should not involve themselves.
This of course begs the question of whether this speech is protected. The First Amendment does not protect "true threats," ...
4
A case for negligence or some other tort would likely never reach the stage where we could answer this question, as lawyers are generally immune from suit for their litigation conduct.
I don't know of any case with facts likey you've described, but my understanding is that the litigation privilege precludes virtually any tort action based on a lawyer's ...
3
Usually web site owners will prefer arbitration and people who would potentially sue web site owners will prefer a court forum, but this is only a typical situation and not a die hard rule for all circumstances.
Features of arbitration:
Binding arbitration is not subject to appeal so it tends to favor repeat, low stakes litigators over one-time high stakes ...
3
Actually, as a general matter, unwanted 'touching' or if you prefer, incidental bodily contact, is most certainly NOT unlawful.
You have no valid expectation of a sphere of invincibility in public.
3
Typically the victims of armed robberies file police reports, and the prosecutor brings charges on behalf of the State. In other words, individuals don't bring suits for armed robbery.
What you might be referring to is that the University breached a tort duty to protect. There is some case law on the topic. For example, in Kline v. 1500 Mass. Ave. ...
Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible
