Bearman v. Notre Dame 453 N.E. 2d 1196 (Ind Ct App 1983) Facts: The plaintiff Christenna Bearman and her husband sued the University of Notre Dame for the damages that resulted from an injury occurring on October 27th, 1979. Mrs. Bearman’s leg was broken when an intoxicated person after walking away from fighting with another intoxicated man fell into her from behind, knocking her down as she was returning to her car after a Notre Dame football game. During the incident there was no security or ushers in the area. Mrs. Bareman argued that she was a business invitee and there was a sense of duty of care that the university should have had for her. The plaintiff was suing based on failure to take the proper guidance and action to prevent …show more content…
Bearman from the injuries that were caused by the intoxicated person. Holding: The Indiana Court of appeals decided to reverse the case and favor the plaintiff, awarding them damages of what was caused during the injury. Along with requiring the defendant, the University of Notre Dame to take action to protect the patrons of the football games from third party individuals. Rationale: Notre Dame made the argument that they cannot be held accountable for actions of a third party, and that they are absent of notice or knowledge of any particular danger to a patron. They later admitted to knowing that alcohol is consumed at these sporting events and on the premises after. This requires the defendant to owe a duty of safety and have a duty to take reasonable precautions in order to protect the plaintiff and to anyone who attends one of the football games. The defendant has to have an understanding that something could happen due to there being alcoholic beverages consumed. Having low numbers of security and staff around while there is alcohol present, and claiming to have knowledge that alcohol is being consumed suggests that there was negligence on the defendant’s part. The court is now requiring the University of Notre Dame to increase the number of ushers along with security at and after their sporting events. Bearman was a business invitee of the University of Notre Dame and expected that Notre Dame owed her a duty of care to protect her from injury and the university was negligent in upholding these expectations. Due to the defendant’s negligence and lack of regard for safety, the court found that the defendant did owe a duty of care to the
Mr. Limon’s mother retained Plaintiff to pursue a tort claim on behalf of Mr. Limon and her (collectively, the “Clients”) against the allegedly negligent driver. The negligent driver had an automobile liability policy issued through defendant Geico. Plaintiff alleges that its attorney’s fee contract with the Clients granted it a one-third contingency fee in “all monies collected” as a result of the lawsuit against the negligent driver. (Petition, ¶¶ 5.2, 5.3) 4.
A business owner may have an affirmative duty to control the wrongful acts of third persons which threaten invitees where the San Francisco Giants has reasonable cause to anticipate such acts and the probability of injury resulting therefrom. Nevertheless, the fundamentals of breach of that duty and causation are customarily questions of fact for the jury's determination. Hall v. Macco Corp., 198 Cal. App. 2d 415 (1961
Payton v. New York 445 U.S. 573 1980 Fourth Amendment search and seizure 6/3 Procedural History: Payton appealed the conviction of the trial court. The New York Court of Appeals upheld the conviction. The Supreme Court reversed and overturned the conviction.
raise the issue in her charge. The court disagreed, holding that Farrow limited her charge to events that occurred prior to her discharge in December 2008. In regards to Farrow’s wrongful discharge claim against Dr. Strange, the court found that Dr. Strange was Farrow’s supervisor, not an employer. Therefore, this claim must fail because there is no claim for wrongful discharge against a non-employer. In her wrongful discharge claim against St. Francis, Farrow alleged St. Francis discharged her because of her outspoken disapproval of and failure to comply with changes to certain procedures instituted by St. Francis which required non-nurses to perform certain tasks.
Justice Charles Lawrence of Illinois Supreme Court made an appalling statement in the case Bradwell v. Illinois back in 1873. "God designed the sexes to occupy different spheres of action, and that it belonged to men to make, apply, and execute the laws, was regarded as an almost axiomatic truth," Lawrence said (Lupton). At that time, other justices also had the same thought; as a result, Bradwell could not be allowed to be an attorney only because she was a married woman. However, in 1981, according to "Sandra Day O'Connor," O'Connor became the first women to be on the United States Supreme Court in 191 years of history of the court. Her becoming a justice in the court gave other women to have a chance to proceed in male-dominant fields, and
Frank Deford spent over forty years writing for Sports Illustrated, commentating sporting events regularly on NPR, and has written over eighteen books. On March 13 of 2013 Deford published, “School Bands Should Not Be Entertainment Adjunct for Sports,” on the NPR website. He addresses the middle aged, educated readers of National Public Radio. His motivation for the article comes from the response from the late president of the NCAA, Myles Brand. Deford was flabbergasted by Brand’s remark that students involved in musical extracurricular received genuine scholarships, not only athletes.
The issue is whether M. Bega’s conduct was outrageous and intolerable. This element is satisfied when the outrageousness requirement "is aimed at limiting frivolous suits and avoiding litigation in situations where only bad manners and mere hurt feelings are involved." Id. "It is insufficient for a defendant to have acted with an intent which is tortious or even criminal." Russo v. White 241 Va. 23. Rather, "liability has been found only where the conduct has been so outrageous in character, and so extreme in degree, as to go beyond all possible bounds of decency, and to be regarded as atrocious, and utterly intolerable in a civilized community."
Business Law Case Study Essay: Burwell v. Hobby Lobby, 573 U.S (2014) Facts: The Green family runs and owns Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc., a national arts and skills chain that has over 500 stores and they have over 13,000 employees. Other facts of the case are that the Green family has been able to organize the business around the values of the Christian faith and has explicitly expressed the desire to run the company as told by Biblical principles, one of which is the belief that the utilization of contraception is wicked. Also, the facts show that under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA), occupation -founded group health care plans must offer certain sorts of preventative care, for example, FDA-accepted contraceptive approaches.
In the case, Mississippi University for Women v. Hogan, the respondent Joe Hogan, who attempted to enroll to the MUW’s School of Nursing, was denied admission (“Mississippi University for,” n.d.). The website, informs that the reason why he was denied enrollment for credit in the School of Nursing, is was created the controversy of whether the decision of the university was a violation to the Equal Protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit reached to a conclusion after analyzing deeply if the reason that the state had to deny enrollment to Hogan had a reasonable justification. The court’s decision could impact and create changes in the educational system in the Mississippi University
Case Law Brief Presser v. Illinois , 116 U.S. 252 ( 1886) By: Ryan Garcia ADJU 203 Concepts of Criminal Law Class Dr. Bryan Silva, Professor Administration of Justice Department Center for Advances Technologies (CAT) Modesto Junior College March 8, 2017 Issue Before the Court: Can states issue laws that restrict citizens freedom to gather in a militia-style group while bearing arms?
Bobby Knight was a former head coach for Indiana University. Knight was a very successful coach for most of his time at this university. He was also known as having a long history of abuse and a violent temper on and off the court. Knight’s actions had been brought to the attention on the University. At first the University continued to let the coach handle things his own way.
Whether the Defendant, Mr. Jones and Cut-Rate Liquor, knew or ought to have known that the customer, Mr. Watkins, was intoxicated? According to the evidence obtained in Direct Examination, Mr. Jones maintains that he did not know and he could not have ought to have known that Mr. Watkins was intoxicated. In fact, Mr. Jones states with a certainty that “At no time on that date did I sell liquor to someone who appeared drunk. That is against the company policy, and I can be fired for doing so.”
Hazing in Sports and College “Many of the rites of passage, those rituals of growing up found in our society, are in the form of such comic, practical joking affairs--which we ignore in the belief that they possess no deeper significance. Yet it is precisely in their being regarded as unimportant that they take on importance. For in them we ritualize and dramatize attitudes which contradict and often embarrass the sacred values which we proclaim through our solemn ceremonies and rituals of nationhood.” -Ralph Ellison, on initiations at West Point, 1969.
The plaintiff is not estopped by her SSDI and long term disability claims. However, the issue should have been decided by the jury. The court foreclosed to grant the plaintiff was not a qualified individual. The issue is whether the district court correctly granted summary judgment in the favor of the defendant because the shaker table rotation rule at issue was an essential function of the employee’s job.
While Mrs. Mabee carried the jugs from the front door toward the back of the house, one of the jugs shattered and spilled on her body and on the dining room floor and furniture, causing severe damage. 2 & 3 -The Product was so defective that the product was unreasonably dangerous and cause the plaintiff’s injury. It was evident the product was defective since as soon the jugs were handed over to Mrs. Mabee by the delivery driver, the jugs shattered causing injury instantly. Jeanny