Exam 5: Unintentional Interference With Persons or Property

Richard drank all the beer at the house one evening, and knowing he was not in a fit state to drive, decided to walk down the highway to the beer store for more. In order not to get lost, he followed the centre line on the road. Milton, who was driving too fast for his headlights on low beam, hit Richard from behind, and seriously injured him.

Initially, under tort theory, only deliberate direct injury was open to action, and compensation payable was open to consideration based on the actual loss suffered by the plaintiff.

A and B entered a variety store owned byC. A purchased two chocolate bars from C, and gave one toB. Unknown to A, B, or C the chocolate bar which A gave to B contained a piece of metal that had fallen into the chocolate mix when the candy bar was made. When B attempted to eat the chocolate, she damaged one of her teeth. She was obliged to have the tooth repaired by a dentist, and in addition, lost a day's work because of the painful injury to her mouth. Her total loss amounted to $300.00. The manufacturer of the chocolate bar has strict liability if the product he manufactures causes injury.

Walter, a chartered accountant, provided services to ABC Manufacturing Inc. owned by Mr. White. Walter took care of all of ABC's financing, bookkeeping, payroll management, financial statement preparation and tax planning and preparation. Early in January, White came to Walter to inform him that he was thinking of selling the business. He explained that the slow economy had considerably dampened his sales and that he wished to sell the business as a going concern before the situation became critical and he might be forced to sell at a loss or liquidate assets to satisfy creditors. Walter listened carefully but suggested that White should wait and sell until after he prepared some current financial statements from which he could offer some constructive advice about the fortunes of the company. Walter also told White that, based on his understanding of the situation, ABC could easily be restored to financial health. Walter prepared draft statements using certain assumptions about the availability, terms and cost of bridge financing and the reduction in operating expenses that could be achieved by rearranging production in certain ways. The assumptions were not fully explained on the statements as Walter preferred to meet with White and discuss the matter fully. However, a footnote stated that "the figures are based on receipt of interim financing and predicted cost reductions." Walter then sent the statements to White for his review and invited further discussion. Two weeks later, Walter received a telephone call from White who told him he had sold the business at a substantial profit to Black. The purchaser had been impressed with the financial position of the company based on Walter's most recent statements and had taken the statements to his bank in order to secure a loan for the purchase price. The loan was granted. Within the first six months under Black's ownership, ABC's sales continued to fall. Black's new accountant prepared financial statements that portrayed a much more dismal situation than had Walter's. Within another month, one of ABC's major suppliers forced the company into bankruptcy. Discuss the liability of the parties in this case, if any, and render a decision.

The Sampson Hair Products company issued by a user who contracted a painful rash from using their shampoo. If Sampson manufactured the product in the same way and to the same standard as a reasonable shampoo manufacturer, and the rash was simply the result of an unusual allergy, Sampson will not be held liable.

While at a baseball game one afternoon, Jack bought Matt a hot dog. When Matt bit into the hot dog he broke his tooth on a nail in it. i. Jack cannot sue the hot dog vendor for breach of contract. ii. Matt can sue the hot dog vendor for breach of contract. iii. Jack can sue the hot dog manufacturer under the tort of manufacturer's liability iv. Matt can sue the hot dog manufacturer under the tort of manufacturer's liability. v. The hot dog manufacturer will be strictly liable for allowing an inherently dangerous hot dog to leave his property and injure Matt. vi. Jack can sue for his emotional distress caused by the sight of blood coming from Matt's mouth.

Ping drove his automobile into a parking lot and, in doing so, collided with the side of a parked automobile that was owned by Nelson. Ping has a duty not to damage the automobile owned by Nelson.

A defendant can receive damages as a result of a tortious act even though he or she may not have experienced any monetary loss.

On a cold winter day, A slipped on the icy sidewalk at the entrance to B's shop. A injured her ankle as a result of the fall, and B hired a taxi to have her taken to the hospital to have her injured ankle examined. On the way to the hospital another automobile collided with the taxi, and A was seriously injured. A was the author of her own misfortune, because she should have foreseen the risk of injury by walking on an icy sidewalk.

Ping drove his automobile into a parking lot and, in doing so, collided with the side of a parked automobile that was owned by Nelson. Ping would be liable for the damage to Nelson's automobile if Ping was negligent in the operation of his motor vehicle.

Mr. Ma operated a dry cleaning plant. Even if there was no intention of harming anyone, he could still be sued by someone harmed by dry cleaning chemicals that escaped from his property. This is an example of what principle of tort law?

On a cold winter day, A slipped on the icy sidewalk at the entrance to B's shop. A injured her ankle as a result of the fall, and B hired a taxi to have her taken to the hospital to have her injured ankle examined. On the way to the hospital another automobile collided with the taxi, and A was seriously injured. If A took legal action against B, B might plead volenti non fit injuria as a defence.

A and B entered a variety store owned byC. A purchased two chocolate bars from C, and gave one toB. Unknown to A, B, or C the chocolate bar which A gave to B contained a piece of metal that had fallen into the chocolate mix when the candy bar was made. When B attempted to eat the chocolate, she damaged one of her teeth. She was obliged to have the tooth repaired by a dentist, and in addition, lost a day's work because of the painful injury to her mouth. Her total loss amounted to $300.00. B may take legal action against the manufacturer of the chocolate bar, because the manufacturer was careless in making the bar.

Andrew, a newly graduated lawyer, failed to do a proper title search of a property, which resulted in his clients actually owning only two-thirds of the property which they thought they had bought. Andrew will be held to the standard of care expected of the reasonable lawyer.

Mr. Ma operated a dry cleaning plant. Even if there was no intention of harming anyone, he could still be sued by someone harmed by dry cleaning chemicals that escaped from his property. This is an example of what tort?

In this era of global trade, discuss the legal issues of which both manufacturers and consumers of imported products should be aware.

Seth owns a large plot of land on which he plants pear trees. These pears are his sole income and have earned him a reputation as a premier grower. His neighbour owns two horses which constantly break through the fence separating the two properties and maraud Seth's pear trees, costing him lost profits, decreasing production and causing general damage to the orchard. Seth would have valid grounds for a claim of nuisance.

On a cold winter day, A slipped on the icy sidewalk at the entrance to B's shop. A injured her ankle as a result of the fall, and B hired a taxi to have her taken to the hospital to have her injured ankle examined. On the way to the hospital another automobile collided with the taxi, and A was seriously injured. B's actions were too remote to be the cause of the automobile accident in which A received serious injuries.

Fun Unlimited Inc. was a manufacturer of children's toys and games. For the Christmas season it produced and offered for sale through its retail distribution channels a toy clown doll. The doll was made of fabric and wore a colourful clown suit with several large, bright red buttons down the front. Mr. and Mrs. Johnson purchased one of the clowns as a Christmas gift for their two-year-old granddaughter. The child was delighted with the toy and played with it for many hours. About a week after Christmas the child's mother noticed two of the buttons missing from the front of the clown suit. A thorough search of the house did not turn up the buttons. Later that day, as she supervised the child's play, the mother observed the little girl pulling a button off the clown suit and placing it in her mouth. Before she could reach the child to retrieve it, the button had been swallowed. In the several days that followed, the child had little appetite and showed considerable abdominal distension. When the child's mother took her to a doctor, X-rays were performed that showed the buttons were lodged in her upper intestinal tract, blocking her entire digestive system. Immediate surgery was required to remove the buttons. The child required considerable postoperative care at home, resulting in substantial time lost from work for both parents. a. Discuss the nature of the legal action which may be taken in this case, including the remedies and damages sought. Also discuss any defences that may be raised and render a decision b. If Fun Unlimited had discovered the ease with which the buttons could be removed by children and had ordered a recall of the product, how would this affect your answer to (a), if at all?

Jacques captured a large rattlesnake while on a camping trip, and brought it home to his apartment in the city. He kept the snake in a glass aquarium which he had covered with a wire screen. One day, after feeding the snake, he accidentally failed to fasten down the screen cover, and the snake escaped from the aquarium. The snake managed to enter the adjoining apartment by way of an open balcony door. The occupant of the adjoining apartment was bitten and seriously injured when she accidentally stepped on the snake. Jacques would probably be strictly liable for any injury caused by the snake, since he should have foreseen the danger associated with keeping a poisonous snake in confinement.