In the court case of Montanile v. Board of Trustees of the National Elevator Industry Health Benefit Plan, the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 was used to determine if an employee wrongfully received funds from a third party after receiving funds from the National Elevator Industry Health Benefits plan. In the court case, the petitioner Robert Montanile was driving when he was struck by a drunk driver resulting in Mr. Montanile be severely injured. The health benefit plan paid upwards in of $121,000 in medical expenses for Mr. Montanile. In order to receive such funds, Mr. Montanile was required to sign a reimbursement agreement reaffirming his obligation to reimburse the plan from any recovery he obtained "as a result of any legal action or settlement or otherwise. After exiting the hospital Mr. Monanile sought legal action against the drunk
Law Office of Enter name here 126 Legal Way Huntsville, AL 35759 RE: Forrester v. Mercury Parcel Service and Richard Hart Dear Enter Name, We have been retained by Ann Forrester and her husband William to represent them regarding the accident that involved, Richard Hart, a delivery driver and employee of Mercury Parcel Service Inc. Injuries and Property Damage Richard Hart was driving a Mercury Parcel delivery van in the course of his duties when he struck Mrs. Forrester as she crossed the street with this vehicle on the morning of February 26, 2014. As a result, Mrs. Forrester has sustained permanent and severe injuries from the incident. The injuries that she suffers from are fractures to her left leg, pelvis and hip, concussion, torn
(Clark Fountain, 2017) Analysis – It appears that the location of the pallets was clear and obvious. The pallets did not possess a risk that would be inherently dangerous to an individual who is using the walkway. This condition appeared to be common and was known to be innocuous in everyday life that it did not have the ability to impose liability on the land and business owner. The plaintiff breached his own duty to assure his safety by not maintaining his direction of walking which does not pose a liability to the defendant. In this case, the plaintiff has been negligent to care for his own
Danieley v. Goldmine Ski Associates, Inc. (1990) 218 Cal. App.3rd 111, a skier who suffered injuries once she collided with a tree brought action against ski area operator claiming negligence in falling to remove tree, which was located adjacent edge of ski run. While on ski run “Upper Claim Jumper” an intermediate ski run, plaintiff wife lost control, collided with huge tree just beyond the turned-out edge of the run. The issue whether ski patrolmen had been negligent in caring for skier after her impact with the tree. The court favor the ski operator, plaintiff appealed.
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.
Second, Judge Barnes was not the one discussing the case in the hallway it was Mack Jones the assistant. Mack Jones being the assistant, discussing or telling another person that Cartwright was in fact a liar about not steeling the stereo would be the one to be sued, however that would be hard because Cartwright would have to prove that the statement is false and this was an intent harm. Both would be hard to prove.
After a thorough analysis of the facts of the case Resurfice v. Hanke, one can see that the decision made by the Supreme Court of Canada, to allow the appeal was definitely the right decision. The Supreme court made the right decision in establishing that it was Hanke’s contributory negligence that acted as the primary cause for the explosion. But for Ralph Hanke placing the hot water hose in the gas tank, the fumes would not have ignited and the explosion would not have happened. The Supreme court was right in realizing that regardless of the presence of minor design flaws, Resurifce should not be punished for Hanke’s error. Secondly the Zamboni was designed in a way to one could easily distinguish the two tanks.
Operating with a team of over 18 highly experienced lawyers, he deals with all manner of cases of malpractice relating to accidents and injuries including medical malpractices, construction site accidents, pedestrian and vehicle accidents among others. He is licensed to practice in both Chicago and Florida. He now has more than 75 employees and has grown to become one of the most recognized injury attorneys in the United States. His love for justice and fairness has made him and his team to begin representing the people who have been wrongfully convicted
A seemingly uncorrelated death of a child becomes an attack on two businesses that brought forth unwanted attention. It reveals how corporations can truly neglect their surroundings and the safety of citizens without remorse. In the quaint town of Woburn, Massachusetts, the death of Anne Anderson’s son due to leukemia quickly transformed from a personal tragedy to an extensive lawsuit. Anne Anderson approached Jan Schlichtmann, a personal injury lawyer, to tackle the case. From the beginning, Anne makes it clear that she does not want money, she simply wants an apology.
Transportation Revolution The transportation revolution is believed to have begun in 1807 when the government seemed it was going to become active in growing infrastructure. The treasury secretary, at the time, Albert Gallatin was asked to develop “a plan for the application of such means as are within the power of Congress, to the purpose of opening roads and making canals” (W&R). This plan was not to happen and throughout this revolution the government was only responsible for a few projects. Without much government aid, entrepreneurs took matters into their own hands, creating competition.
Kaeli Ariail IT 4723 Prof. Tatum January 20th, 2017 Individual Lab 1 Tort Law Case 1 – Wilson v. Midway Games, Inc. In 1997, Yancy S. stabbed his friend Noah Wilson in the chest. The victim’s mother, Andrea, believed it had to do with an “addiction” to a popular video game called Mortal Kombat. Andrea Wilson blames the nature of the game for the death of her son. Were the game not so violent, perhaps Yancy would not have killed Noah.
Teresa's case was submitted to the jury on the counts alleging breach of contract, negligence and wantonness, and the tort of outrage. The jury returned a verdict against Akins and in favor of both plaintiffs. The jury assessed compensatory damages at $450,000 and punitive damages at $150,000, for a total of $600,000 in Megan's case; in Teresa's case, the jury assessed compensatory damages of $200,000 and punitive damages of $150,000, for a total of $350,000.”
Transportation During the Revolutionary War Transporting goods and supplies took a lot of time to arrive at its destination. transportation they mostly used were wagons or ships. An example of this is when the tea brought to the colonists were brought by the east india company was carried on boat. Lots of the supply routes were known so they got raided or attacked for their valuable goods. Transportation was important in American Revolution by transporting useful goods,food,supplies,weapons anything that would help out the troops and townspeople of that colonies.
The building of roads, canals and railroads played a large role in the United States during the 1800s. They served the purpose of connecting towns and settlements so that goods could be transported quickly and more efficiently. These goods could be transported fast, cheap and in safe way through the Erie Canal that was built to connect the Great Lakes to New York. Railroads were important during Civil War as well, because it helped in the transportation of goods, supplies and weapons when necessary. These new forms of transportation shaped the United States into the place that it is today.
Case Summary Randy Samuels, ex-programmer at Silicon Techtronics, was charged for the manslaughter of Bart Matthews who was killed by Robbie CX30. It was manufactured at Silicon Techtronics and Randy obviously programmed the robot erroneously which caused the robot to kill Bart. The Prosecuting Attorney, Jane McMurdock, found evidence which shows that Randy improperly interpreted the physics formula. The programs specifications do reflect what Randy implemented in the robot. He interchanged and miscalculated the formulas that was handed to him.
