Haines V. Hanes Case

SAMUEL S. HAINES v. HENRY COUNTY BOARD OF EDUCATION

(This is our superintendent today) Imagine seeing you and your kids being struck by a bus that could’ve killed you. Mr. Samuel S. Haines had this happen to him. He was the victim,also the plaintiff whenever he called suites on this accidents. The case was held at the Tennessee State Court. In the Tennessee State Court website, the text states, “It is the mission of the State Court of Henry County to do justice, as nearly as possible, to all persons coming before our Court, and to the community at large.” On October 4,2005, in Paris Tennessee, Mr. Samuel Haines was struck by a bus from the Henry County Board of education. Mr. Haines at first tried to stop and apply his brakes when the car

But, after the accident the plaintiff reported back pain, so he went to Dr. Gulish. Years after the accident he was still experiencing pain. Dr. Gulish found some signs that could have caused him pain, but an anonymous call said that the plaintiff was selling his prescribed medicine. But, no real evidence was found. The plaintiff did this because he wanted the judge to think it caused major injuries to him so that he would win the case. Plus, it makes the fines increase. “The court then went on to award damages to Plaintiff of $10,000 for past physical pain, mental suffering, and loss of enjoyment of life; $15,000 for future physical pain, mental suffering, and loss of enjoyment of life; $8,700 for past medical expenses; $12,000 for past lost earning capacity; and $10,000 for future lost earning capacity. The court found that the Henry County Board of Education was 90% at fault for Plaintiff’s injuries, and the unknown driver was 10% at fault. As such, the court awarded Plaintiff $50,130 from the Defendant. The Defendant timely filed a notice of appeal to this

Organization: 1. This project is well organized from beginning to end. Student met all required deadlines. 2. This project is generally well organized. Met all deadlines. 3. This project has a few errors in organizational format that become distracting to the reader. Student missed one of the required deadlines or turned in one of the aspects late. 4. This project has limited organization. Reader understanding is impaired.

Creativity: 1. Project has extremely creative and original ideas. Truly showed the student’s creative talents. 2. Project has several creative and original ideas. Most aspects of the project demonstrated some level of creativity. 3. Project has some creative and original ideas. Some aspects of the project demonstrated some level of creativity. 4. Project has minimal creativity and original ideas.

Accuracy: 1. Student provided accurate and detailed explanations where explanations were required. All dates, claims and facts were detailed and true. All sources were correctly cited. 2. Student provided accurate and somewhat detailed explanations where required. Most claims were detailed and true. Sources were cited with only one or two minor