XI.A. Action Versus Inaction | Alexandra Anthony | October 28, 2013

H2O

XI.A. Action Versus Inaction

Original Creator: Jonathan Zittrain Current Version: Alexandra Anthony Show/Hide
  1. 1 Show/Hide More Moch Co. v. Rensselaer Water Co.--"The Failure to Supply Water During a Fire"
    Original Creator: Jonathan Zittrain Current Version: Alexandra Anthony
    In questions of duty, should courts draw a distinction between inaction that has the consequence of harm, and positive action that creates harm?
    Notes:
    The defendant water company contracts with a city to supply the city with water. While the contract was still in force, a fire broke out and spread to the plaintiff’s warehouse, destroying it and its contents. The plaintiff alleges that the destruction of his warehouse was caused by defendant’s negligence in failing provide an adequate supply of water to combat the fire, despite prompt notification of the fire, the capacity to properly supply the water, and the contractual obligation to supply water in the manner needed.
  2. 2 Show/Hide More Harper v. Herman--"The Boat Owner Who Failed to Warn"
    Original Creator: Jonathan Zittrain Current Version: Alexandra Anthony
    Does being a social host create additional duties to guests? Should an individual’s superior knowledge of a dangerous condition require him or her to disclose that danger?
    Notes:
    Defendant—an experienced boat owner—invited his friends on a boat outing. Plaintiff was brought along the outing by one of the invited guests. Prior to the outing, plaintiff and defendant did not know each other. The defendant took the group out to a spot where he knew the water was deep enough for swimming but too shallow for diving. After asking if the defendant was going into the water and receiving an affirmative, the plaintiff dove into the water without warning. As a result of the dive, plaintiff struck the bottom of the lake and severed his spinal cord, rendering himself a quadriplegic.
  3. 3 Show/Hide More Union Pacific Railway v. Cappier--"The Railroad that Ran Over a Man and Let Him Bleed to Death"
    Original Creator: Jonathan Zittrain Current Version: Alexandra Anthony
    Should non-negligent owners and operators of an instrumentality have a duty to assist individuals who are harmed by the instrumentality?
    Notes:
    Plaintiff’s son was run over by a freight car operated by the defendant, severing an arm and a leg. The collision was held to be the fault of plaintiff’s negligence alone. However, after the impact, the employees manning the car did not stop and attempt to administer any emergency care.
  4. 4 Show/Hide More Farwell v. Keaton--"The Fatal Pickup Attempt"
    Original Creator: Jonathan Zittrain Current Version: Alexandra Anthony
    Should we expect partners in a joint activity—in this case, chasing after girls—to have a duty to protect and aid each other? If someone provides aid, should courts impose a duty on the aiding party to provide a certain standard of care for the injured party?
    Notes:
    Plaintiff and the defendant on appeal were friends. Their attempt to approach two girls resulted in six boys chasing the pair back to the parking lot and severely beating the plaintiff. Defendant escaped unharmed, but returned later for his friend. Rather than take the plaintiff to the hospital, defendant applied ice to his head, drove him around for approximately two-hours and eventually left the plaintiff in the driveway of his grandparents’ house. Plaintiff’s grandparents discovered him the next morning and took him to the hospital. The plaintiff died three days later of an epidural hematoma (bleeding inside the skull).
  5. 5 Show/Hide More Randi W. v. Muroc Joint Unified School District--"The Alleged Sexual Predator's Recommenders"
    Original Creator: Jonathan Zittrain Current Version: Alexandra Anthony
    Should courts recognize a broader rule for creating a duty, capable of encompassing wrongful communications?
    Notes:
    Plaintiff was molested by a school administrator. The administrator had a past history of sexual misconduct. This history was known to individuals who had recommended him for the position he occupied when the incident with the plaintiff occurred. However, those individuals did not include this information in their letters. In her lawsuit, the plaintiff sued the recommenders, on the theory that it was negligent for them to withhold information which could foreseeably lead to harm.
Find Items

Search below to find items, then drag and drop items onto playlists you own. To add items to nested playlists, you must first expand those playlists.

SEARCH
Leitura Garamond Futura Verdana Proxima Nova Dagny Web
small medium large extra-large