Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Wk2 1 operation2


Published on

  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Wk2 1 operation2

  1. 1. <ul><li>REVIEW </li></ul><ul><li>OPERATION OF ORGANIZATION II: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>PARTICIPANT LIABILITY </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>DEFENSES TO PARTICIPANT LIABILITY CLAIM </li></ul></ul><ul><li>WRAP-UP </li></ul>
  2. 2. <ul><li>OPERATION OF ORGANIZATION I </li></ul><ul><ul><li>FINANCING STADIUM </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Use of public funds must be justified by public benefits </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Political > legal issue now </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>FORMATION OF CONTRACT </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Offer </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Acceptance </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Consideration </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>No defense to contractual obligation </li></ul></ul></ul>
  3. 3. <ul><li>TORT LAW CONTINUUM (DEGREE OF FAULT) </li></ul><ul><ul><li>No fault: No legal action possible </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Negligence: Plain stupidity </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Reckless: Extreme stupidity </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Intentional torts: Defendant did it on purpose </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Criminal acts: Under criminal law </li></ul></ul>
  4. 4. <ul><li>PARTICIPANTS </li></ul><ul><ul><li>People coming into your premise to actively engage in the program or service you provide </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Example: Patrons of fitness club, adult students in community art class </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Negligence case: Injured participant may argue that your organization is responsible for her injury </li></ul></ul>
  5. 5. <ul><li>NEGLIGENCE: 4 ELEMENTS </li></ul><ul><ul><li>A plaintiff bringing an action for negligence must initially prove 4 elements </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>4 elements </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Duty </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Breach of duty </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Causation </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Damage </li></ul></ul></ul>
  6. 6. <ul><li>DUTY: WHETHER D MUST HAVE PROTECTED P </li></ul><ul><ul><li>From relationship </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>If no relationship, no duty can be imposed </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Example: Varsity swimmers just passed a kid in a pond crying for help  no relationship, no duty </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Question of law </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Matter of policy judgment </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Imposing duty  achieve stricter safety standard </li></ul></ul></ul>
  7. 7. <ul><li>DUTY: STATUS OF PLAINTIFF </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Trespasser: A person on the premise without permission </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>What is the duty owed to a trespasser? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Undiscovered trespasser: No duty </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Discovered trespasser: Only for “man-made death trap” </li></ul></ul></ul>
  8. 8. <ul><li>DUTY: STATUS OF PLAINTIFF </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Licensee: A person on the premise with consent but brings no economic benefit to the owner (e.g., party guests) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>What is the duty owed to a licensee? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>All known dangers in the premise </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Inspection not required (i.e., only “known”) </li></ul></ul></ul>
  9. 9. <ul><li>DUTY: STATUS OF PLAINTIFF </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Invitee: A person on the premise with invitation who brings $$$ for the owner </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Duty of care owed to invitee (most demanding) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>All known danger; & </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Danger that might have been discovered by reasonable inspection </li></ul></ul></ul>
  10. 10. <ul><li>DUTY OWED TO PARTICIPANT (= INVITEE) </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Types of duty owed to participant </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Duty of reasonable inspection </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Duty of safe facility design </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Duty to warn about hidden danger </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Duty to repair within a reasonable time </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Duty to emergency medical service (e.g., paramedics) </li></ul></ul></ul>
  11. 11. <ul><li>DUTY FROM SPECIAL RELATIONSHIP </li></ul><ul><ul><li>General rule 1: K-12 teachers and coaches have duty of care for their young students </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>In loco parantis : “Standing in the place of a parent” </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Policy: Protection of young children </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>But Cs may not sue for “negligence” </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Many jurisdictions have abolished the doctrine </li></ul></ul></ul>
  12. 12. <ul><li>DUTY FROM SPECIAL RELATIONSHIP </li></ul><ul><ul><li>General rule 2: Colleges & universities do not have duty of care for students engaged in sport events </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Kleinknecht v. Gettysburg College (p. 466): Exception </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>An intercollegiate athlete died from a heart attack during a regular practice session </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Special relationship imposes duty of care on the college because victim was a member of intercollegiate sport team (victim did it more than self interest) </li></ul></ul></ul>
  13. 13. <ul><li>BREACH OF DUTY: WHETHER D FAILED TO MEET REASONABLE PERSON STANDARD </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Question of fact: Decided by a jury </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Standard of care: Reasonable Prudent Person Q </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Would a Reasonable Prudent Person in Defendant’s shoe act in the same way? </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>A jury compare D & imaginary person (= RPP) </li></ul></ul></ul>
  14. 14. <ul><li>BREACH OF DUTY </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Negligence per se </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>If D violates a law directly dealing with the issue (e.g., Defendant’s DUI  “it was negligent by itself!”) </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>No need to prove breach of duty  go to next question (“causation”) </li></ul></ul></ul>
  15. 15. <ul><li>CAUSATION: 2 TYPES </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Causation in fact (“but for” causation): if Defendant was not that stupid, Plaintiff may not got injured </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Proximate cause (foreseeability): Plaintiff’s injury is a type of injury that was foreseeable when Defendant committed the negligent act </li></ul></ul>
  16. 16. <ul><li>DAMAGE </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Damage must be realized & compensable </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Estimation of damage </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Compensatory damage: Back to normal condition </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Punitive damage: Giving a hard lesson to an egregious defendant (very reprehensible fault) </li></ul></ul></ul>
  17. 17. <ul><li>DEFENSES: STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS </li></ul><ul><ul><li>“ Too bad, but you’re late” </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>A tort claim must be brought into court within a statute of limitation (ex. 3 years from injury) </li></ul></ul>
  18. 18. <ul><li>DEFENSES: ACT OF GOD </li></ul><ul><ul><li>“ It was not me…” </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Must be a truly uncontrollable event </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Must have been unforeseeable </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Baseball practice right before imminent thunderstorm </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>No defense available if it was foreseeable danger! </li></ul></ul></ul>
  19. 19. <ul><li>DEFENSES: CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE </li></ul><ul><ul><li>“ You have a dirty hand too” </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>If the Plaintiff did not act reasonably to protect herself, no recovery at all (e.g., jaywalk) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Even small fault negates complete recovery (harsh) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Abrogated in most states </li></ul></ul>
  20. 20. <ul><li>DEFENSES: COMPARATIVE NEGLIGENCE </li></ul><ul><ul><li>“ You can only get what you are deserved” </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Pure comparative negligence </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>P’s damage is reduced in proportion to the P’s fault </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Example: 70% (P) & 30% (D)  P may recover 30% of damage </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Modified comparative negligence </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>No recovery at all if P’s fault exceeds a statutory limit (ex. 50% of fault) </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Example: 51% (P) & 49% (D)  No recovery </li></ul></ul></ul>
  21. 21. <ul><li>DEFENSES: ASSUMPTION OF RISK </li></ul><ul><ul><li>“ You came this town while you knew it was dangerous” </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>If it is an “open & obvious risk” </li></ul></ul>
  22. 22. <ul><li>DEFENSES: LIMITS ON ASSUMPTION OF RISK </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Limits of the defense </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Not cover entire premise but only immediate area around the playing field + bleachers </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Not for injury arising in the parking lot </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Distraction doctrine: If risk is not inherently involved with the event  no assumption of risk defense (see Lowe case in Module 4, p. 514) </li></ul></ul>
  23. 23. <ul><li>DEFENSES: IMMUNITY </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Governmental immunity </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>“ The King doesn’t do anything stupid” </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>From sovereign immunity (England) </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Federal Tort Claims Act: Allows tort action except “discretionary functions” of its officers </li></ul></ul></ul>
  24. 24. <ul><li>DEFENSES: IMMUNITY </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Charitable immunity </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Common law: charitable entities are immune from tort liability </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Most states have repudiated the doctrine </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Roberts v. TBBAA </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Fact: P injured at a soccer game while going to a concession </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Rule: </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><ul><li>A charitable entity is immune from tort liability if injury arises from “an event integral to” the charitable event </li></ul></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Concessions are integral to the event </li></ul></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Remanded: Lower court must decide whether P was contributor (no defense) or beneficiary (defense accepted) </li></ul></ul></ul></ul>
  25. 25. <ul><li>PARTICIPANT LIABILITY </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Duty: Different status </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Breach of duty: Proving negligence </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Causation </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Damage </li></ul></ul>
  26. 26. <ul><li>DEFENSES TO NEGLIGENCE CLAIM </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Statute of limitations </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Act of God </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Contributory & comparative negligence </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Assumption of risk </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Immunity </li></ul></ul>