The Importance Of Tort Law

The constitution including its amendments is considered the “supreme law of the land”. The constitution has been enhanced by being steadily challenged to further interpret the meaning. These test come through many different legal cases that are brought to the Supreme Court; for example. The first amendment states “Congress shall make no law…prohibiting…or abridging the freedom of speech…” Though there are restrictions on a person’s first amendment rights, in the Hazlewood v. Kuhlmeier case this amendment was challenge when students of the school newspaper believed their rights were taken away by the principal because two pages of articles were deleted from the paper.

Various guarantees create zones of privacy. The right of association contained in the penumbras of the first amendment is one, as we have seen. The Third Amendment in its prohibition against the quartering of soldiers “in any house” in time of peace without the consent of the owner is another facet of that privacy. The Fourth Amendment explicitly affirms the “right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures.” The Fifth Amendment in its self-incrimination clause enables the citizens to create a zone of privacy which government may not force him to surrender to his determent.

These directors were claiming that the ruling that led to their conviction had violated the 14th Amendment, which states citizens’ rights to privacy and equal protections from the laws. Issue: Is there existence of a right in the Bill of Rights allowing married couples to use contraceptives to prevent conception? Decision: Yes.

The U.S. Supreme Court has found that the Constitution implicitly grants a right to privacy against governmental intrusion. This right to privacy has been the justification for decisions involving a wide range of civil liberties cases, including Pierce v. Society of Sisters , which invalidated a successful 1922 Oregon initiative requiring compulsory public education, Griswold v. Connecticut , where a right to privacy was first established explicitly, Roe v. Wade , which struck down a Texas abortion law and thus restricted state powers to enforce laws against abortion, and Lawrence v. Texas , which struck down a Texas sodomy law and thus eliminated state powers to enforce laws against sodomy. The 1890 Warren and Brandeis article "The Right To

The Supreme Court case struck down the Massachusetts law that claimed that only married couples could obtain contraceptives that registered doctors or pharmacists provided. The Court stated that the law did not satisfy the rational basis test offered by the 14th Amendment. Perhaps one of the most widely known and controversial Supreme Court cases regarding contraceptives, Roe v. Wade still gains attention in legal debates today. The Supreme Court stated that by banning a woman’s right to an abortion, Texas violated her constitutional rights. Women hold the right to an abortion during the first trimester of pregnancy under their 14th Amendment rights.

However, Justice Goldberg took a more refined approach than Justice Douglas, focusing solely on the Ninth and Fourteenth Amendments. He argued that the Connecticut statute infringed upon the un-enumerated yet fundamental right of privacy in marriage, directly opposing the Ninth Amendment. When the Fourteenth Amendment was enacted, states were prohibited from "abridging fundamental personal liberties" guaranteed by the Bill of Rights (Griswold v. Connecticut). Justice Goldberg asserted that these two amendments in conjunction were sufficient evidence of the unconstitutionality of the Connecticut statute. (Griswold v.

Connecticut (1965), the Supreme Court struck down a law barring the use of contraceptives by married couples. In Griswold for the first time the Supreme Court recognized that couples, at least married couples, had a right to privacy, drawing on the Fourth Amendment's protection of private homes from searches and seizures without a warrant based on probable cause, the Fourteenth Amendment's guarantee of due process of law in the states, and the Ninth Amendment's assurance that rights not specified in the Constitution are "retained by the people". Eisenstadt v. Baird (1972) expanded the scope of sexual privacy rights to unmarried persons. In 1973, the choice whether to have an abortion was found to be protected by the Constitution in Roe v. Wade

Whenever the death of a person results from any act, conduct, occurrence, transaction, or circumstances which, if death had not ensued, would have entitled such person to recover damages in respect thereof, the person or party who, or the corporation which, would have been liable if death had not ensued shall be liable in an action for damages, not withstanding the death of the person injured. The wrongful death statute is not in derogation of the common law, and it does not take away any common law right. The wrongful death statute evidences a legislative intent to place the cost of unsafe activities upon the actors who engage in them, and thereby provide a tortious conduct."

“On January 22, 1973, the U.S. Supreme Court announced its decision in Roe v. Wade, a challenge to a Texas statute that made it a crime to perform an abortion unless a woman’s life was at stake. The case had been filed by “Jane Roe,” an unmarried woman who wanted to safely and legally end her pregnancy. Siding with Roe, the court struck down the Texas law. In its ruling, the court recognized for the first time that the constitutional right to privacy “is broad enough to encompass a woman’s decision whether or not to terminate her pregnancy” (Roe v. Wade, 1973).

The Right to Abortion On January 22, 1973, in a 7-2 ruling, the U.S. Supreme Court handed down it’s landmark decision in the case of Roe v. Wade, which recognized that the constitutional right to privacy extends to a woman’s right to make her own personal medical decisions — including the decision to have an abortion without interference from politicians (Planned Parenthood). There are many moments in history when Roe v. Wade has been so close to being overturned, yet it is still in place. Abortion should stay legal, or not overturned, for the health of women everywhere. First, this important case took place at the time of abortion being illegal in most states, including Texas, where Roe v. Wade began.

With almost half the nation divided among their views, abortion remains one of the most controversial topics in our society. Since Roe v. Wade, our views in society as well as following court cases have been progressing toward the woman’s right to choose. The precedent set by Roe v. Wade made the Supreme Court acknowledge that it cannot rule specifically when life begins and it also affirms that it is the woman’s right to have an abortion under the 14th Amendment. In the 1st Amendment, the Establishment Clause forbids the government from passing laws “which aid one religion, aid all religions, or prefer one religion over another”. Many Christian pro-lifers use their religious beliefs to dispute when life begins.

A book by Priscilla M. Regan: “Legislating Privacy”, explains how deep the concept of privacy can create beyond the vacancy of public pressure between individuals and society. “When viewed as a fundamental right, privacy can be interpreted as being involved in a range of constitutional and moral issues — freedom from surveillance and searches, reproductive freedom, freedom to associate, confidentiality of communications, and family values.” (Regan 48). According to Reagan's statement, privacy is a sensitive topic when approached from many different angles. The constitution and moral issues as Reagan discuss is directly cohesive to the case of the Minnesota school district.

56. Webster v. Reproductive Health Services (1989): The Court upheld Missouri restrictions on abortions that “public employees and public facilities were not to be used in performing or assisting abortions unnecessary to save the mother 's life; encouragement and counseling to have abortions was prohibited; and physicians were to perform viability tests upon women in their twentieth (or more) week of pregnancy.” It was a fractured decision that seemed to contradict Roe v. Wade but the court decided to not revisit any parts of Roe v. Wade after this case. The Missouri restrictions did not violate the right to privacy or the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment.

Negligence is the breach of a duty caused by the omission to do something which a reasonable man, guided by those considerations which ordinarily regulate the conduct of human affairs would do, or doing something which a prudent and reasonable man would not do. Actionable negligence consists in the neglect of the use of ordinary care or skill towards a person to whom the defendant owes the duty of observing ordinary care and skill, by which neglect the plaintiff has suffered injury to his person or property. ELEMENTS OF NEGLIGENCE CLAIMS The definition involves three constituents of negligence: (1) A legal duty to exercise due care on the part of the party complained of towards the party complaining the former’s conduct within the scope

Julian wants to sue David, the other player. In his complaint, which tort theory is Julian’s attorney most likely to allege and what will he have to prove for Julian to be successful? 
Julian’s attorney is most likely to allege Intentional Tort for his complaint to be successful. An intentional tort occurs whenever someone intends an action that results in harm to a person’s body, reputation, emotional well-being, or property. During the game David kicked Julian in the head while Julian was in possession on the ball.