Civil Lawsuit

The Supreme courtroom has issued guidelines for amity of punitive regaining to include (1) the degree of reprehensibility of the defendant's misconduct, (2) the disparity mingled with the material or potential harm suffered by the complainant and the punitive insurance award, and (3) the difference between the punitive damages awarded by the jury and the civil penalties authorized or enforce in comparable cases (Campbell, 123 S.Ct. 1513).

Negligence is the bankruptcy to use the level of guardianship that a reasonably prudent and c beful soulfulness would use under similar circumstances and such failure causes the injured party's damages (Black's Law Dictionary 1032). Thus, a slackness case has four elements: duty, breach of that duty, cause-in-fact (the breach actually caused the harm), and actual harm d whiz (Legal study Institute n.p.). Medical malpractice is one of the most frequent claims of tortious conduct in the healthc be environment. For example, in the case of Didato v. Stehler the Virginia Supreme Court held that parents could sue a pediatrician who failed to properly screen them for the genetic traits that resulted in their troika child being born with sickle cell anemia. (554 S.E. 2d 42 (Va. 2001)). Notably, the pediatrician was held to the standard of other pediatricians practicing at that season because the standard of care against which negligence is measured is the standard of care for that particular tortfeasor and/or that particular occupation (Legal Informa

Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition. (1990). St. Paul, MN: double-u Publishing.

Strict liability torts do not depend on either the negligence or the wrongful intent of the tortfeasor. Instead, they are established when a particular action causes damage (Legal Information Institute n.p.).

The elements of a strict liability case are that (1) the defendant sold a product in the range of its business (2) that was defective when sold (3) and the consumer used the product in a manner reasonably anticipated and (4) suffered damages as a direct result of the defect. Strict liability torts alter into two general class. Products liability torts are those in which the vender is liable for defective or hazardous products that unduly stake consumers' safety. Such torts are based on the premise that when a manufacturer presents his goods to the public for sale, he represents that they are suitable for their mean use (Black's Law Dictionary 1422). Another general category of strict liability torts are those concerning statutory violations and ultra-hazardous activities such as blasting or transporting hazardous materials, or keeping grave or wild animals (Riley n.p.). In such cases courts impose a strict duty of care on tortfeasors because they are in the best position to protect the public from the undue find of harm their activities pose to the community (American Bar Association n.p.). In the healthcare environment, strict liability cases often involve aesculapian products such as prosthetics, medical equipment and pharmaceuticals. Thus, in Grinnell v. Charles Pfizer & Co., the California Court of Appeal held a manufacturer strictly liable for the damages caused to individuals w
Ordercustompaper.com is a professional essay writing service at which you can buy essays on any topics and disciplines! All custom essays are written by professional writers!