HOME TheInfoList.com
Providing Lists of Related Topics to Help You Find Great Stuff
[::MainTopicLength::#1500] [::ListTopicLength::#1000] [::ListLength::#15] [::ListAdRepeat::#3]

Malpractice
In the law of torts, malpractice, also known as professional negligence, is an "instance of negligence or incompetence on the part of a professional".[1] Professionals who may become the subject of malpractice actions include:medical professionals: a medical malpractice claim may be brought against a doctor or other healthcare provider who fails to exercise the degree of care and skill that a similarly situated professional of the same medical specialty would provide under the circumstances.[2] lawyers: a legal malpractice claim may be brought against a lawyer who fails to render services with the level of skill, care and diligence that a reasonable lawyer would apply under similar circumstances.[1] financial professionals: professionals such as accountants, financial planners and stockbrokers, may be subject to claims for professional negligence based upon their failure to meet professional standards when providing services to their clients.[3] architects: an architect or const
[...More...]

"Malpractice" on:
Wikipedia
Google
Yahoo
Parouse

Standard Of Care
In tort law, the standard of care is the only degree of prudence and caution required of an individual who is under a duty of care. The requirements of the standard are closely dependent on circumstances.[1] Whether the standard of care has been breached is determined by the trier of fact, and is usually phrased in terms of the reasonable person. It was famously described in Vaughn v
[...More...]

"Standard Of Care" on:
Wikipedia
Google
Yahoo
Parouse

picture info

Rylands V Fletcher
Rylands v Fletcher
Rylands v Fletcher
[1868] UKHL 1 was a decision by the House of Lords which established a new area of English tort law. Rylands employed contractors to build a reservoir, playing no active role in its construction. When the contractors discovered a series of old coal shafts improperly filled with debris, they chose to continue work rather than properly blocking them up. The result was that on 11 December 1860, shortly after being filled for the first time, Rylands' reservoir burst and flooded a neighbouring mine, run by Fletcher, causing £937 worth of damage, equivalent to £102,768 [1] in 2015 terms. Fletcher brought a claim under negligence against Rylands, through which the case eventually went to the Exchequer of Pleas.[2] The majority ruled in favour of Rylands
[...More...]

"Rylands V Fletcher" on:
Wikipedia
Google
Yahoo
Parouse

Statute Of Limitations
Statutes of limitations are laws passed by legislative bodies in common law systems to set the maximum time after an event within which legal proceedings may be initiated.[1] When the period of time specified in a statute of limitations passes, a claim might no longer be filed, or, if filed, may be liable to be struck out if the defense against that claim is, or includes, that the claim is time-barred as having been filed after the statutory limitations period. When a statute of limitations expires in a criminal case, the courts no longer have jurisdiction. Most crimes that have statutes of limitations are distinguished from serious crimes as these may be brought at any time. In civil law systems, similar provisions are typically part of their civil or criminal codes and known collectively as periods of prescription
[...More...]

"Statute Of Limitations" on:
Wikipedia
Google
Yahoo
Parouse

False Imprisonment
False imprisonment occurs when a person is restricted in their personal movement within any area without justification or consent.[1] Actual physical restraint is not necessary for false imprisonment to occur. False imprisonment is a common-law felony and a tort. It applies to private as well as governmental detention
[...More...]

"False Imprisonment" on:
Wikipedia
Google
Yahoo
Parouse

Transferred Intent
Transferred intent (or transferred malice in English law) is a legal doctrine that holds that, when the intention to harm one individual inadvertently causes a second person to be hurt instead, the perpetrator is still held responsible. To be held legally responsible under the law, usually the court must demonstrate that the person has criminal intent, that is, that the person knew another would be harmed by his or her actions and wanted this harm to occur. If a murderer intends to kill John, but accidentally kills George instead, the intent is transferred from John to George, and the killer is held to have had criminal intent. Transferred intent also applies to tort law.[1] In tort law, there are generally five areas in which transferred intent is applicable: battery, assault, false imprisonment, trespass to land, and trespass to chattels
[...More...]

"Transferred Intent" on:
Wikipedia
Google
Yahoo
Parouse

Comparative Negligence
Comparative negligence, or non-absolute contributory negligence outside the United States, is a partial legal defense that reduces the amount of damages that a plaintiff can recover in a negligence-based claim, based upon the degree to which the plaintiff's own negligence contributed to cause the injury.[1] When the defense is asserted, the factfinder, usually a jury, must decide the degree to which the plaintiff's negligence and the combined negligence of all other relevant actors all contributed to cause the plaintiff's damages.[2] It is a modification of the doctrine of contributory negligence that disallows any recovery by a plaintiff whose negligence contributed even minimally to causing the damages.[1]Contents1 Explanation 2 Contributory negligence doctrine 3 See also 4 ReferencesExplanation[edit] Prior to the late 1960s, only a few states had adopted the system. When comparative negligence was adopted, three main versions were used
[...More...]

"Comparative Negligence" on:
Wikipedia
Google
Yahoo
Parouse

picture info

Common Law
Common law
Common law
(also known as judicial precedent or judge-made law, or case law) is that body of law derived from judicial decisions of courts and similar tribunals.[1][2][3][4][5] The defining characteristic of “common law” is that it arises as precedent. In cases where the parties disagree on what the law is, a common law court looks to past precedential decisions of relevant courts, and synthesizes the principles of those past cases as applicable to the current facts. If a similar dispute has been resolved in the past, the court is usually bound to follow the reasoning used in the prior decision (a principle known as stare decisis)
[...More...]

"Common Law" on:
Wikipedia
Google
Yahoo
Parouse

Malicious Prosecution
Malicious prosecution is a common law intentional tort, while like the tort of abuse of process, its elements include (1) intentionally (and maliciously) instituting and pursuing (or causing to be instituted or pursued) a legal action (civil or criminal) that is (2) brought without probable cause and (3) dismissed in favor of the victim of the malicious prosecution. In some jurisdictions, the term "malicious prosecution" denotes the wrongful initiation of criminal proceedings, while the term "malicious use of process" denotes the wrongful initiation of civil proceedings. Criminal prosecuting attorneys and judges are protected from tort liability for malicious prosecution by doctrines of prosecutorial immunity and judicial immunity. Moreover, the mere filing of a complaint cannot constitute an abuse of process. The parties who have abused or misused the process have gone beyond merely filing a lawsuit
[...More...]

"Malicious Prosecution" on:
Wikipedia
Google
Yahoo
Parouse

Duty To Rescue
A duty to rescue is a concept in tort law that arises in a number of cases, describing a circumstance in which a party can be held liable for failing to come to the rescue of another party in peril. In common law systems, it is rarely formalized in statutes which would bring the penalty of law down upon those who fail to rescue
[...More...]

"Duty To Rescue" on:
Wikipedia
Google
Yahoo
Parouse

Proximate Cause
In the law, a proximate cause is an event sufficiently related to an injury that the courts deem the event to be the cause of that injury. There are two types of causation in the law: cause-in-fact, and proximate (or legal) cause. Cause-in-fact is determined by the "but for" test: But for the action, the result would not have happened.[1] For example, but for running the red light, the collision would not have occurred. The action is a necessary condition, but may not be a sufficient condition, for the resulting injury
[...More...]

"Proximate Cause" on:
Wikipedia
Google
Yahoo
Parouse

Res Ipsa Loquitur
In the common law of torts, res ipsa loquitur (Latin for "the thing speaks for itself") is a doctrine that infers negligence from the very nature of an accident or injury in the absence of direct evidence on how any defendant behaved. Although modern formulations differ by jurisdiction, common law originally stated that the accident must satisfy the necessary elements of negligence: duty, breach of duty, causation, and injury
[...More...]

"Res Ipsa Loquitur" on:
Wikipedia
Google
Yahoo
Parouse

Calculus Of Negligence
In the United States, the calculus of negligence, also known as the Hand rule, Hand formula, or BPL formula, is a term coined by Judge Learned Hand
Learned Hand
and describes a process for determining whether a legal duty of care has been breached (see negligence). The original description of the calculus was in United States
United States
v
[...More...]

"Calculus Of Negligence" on:
Wikipedia
Google
Yahoo
Parouse

Rescue Doctrine
[1]In the USA, the rescue doctrine of the law of torts holds that if a tortfeasor creates a circumstance that places the tort victim in danger, the tortfeasor is liable not only for the harm caused to the victim, but also the harm caused to any person injured in an effort to rescue that victim. This doctrine was originally created in case law by Wagner v. International Railway,[2] 232 N.Y. 176 (1926), in which Justice Cardozo stated "Danger invites rescue. The cry of distress is the summons to relief [...] The emergency begets the man. The wrongdoer may not have foreseen the coming of a deliverer. He is accountable as if he had." Essentially it means that the rescuer can recover damages from a defendant when the rescuer is injured rescuing someone. The defendant is usually negligent in causing the accident to occur. Other cases have occurred where the plaintiff is injured rescuing the defendant and is able to collect damages.[citation needed] In Wagner v
[...More...]

"Rescue Doctrine" on:
Wikipedia
Google
Yahoo
Parouse

Negligent Entrustment
Negligent entrustment is a cause of action in tort law that arises where one party (the entrustor) is held liable for negligence because they negligently provided another party (the entrustee) with a dangerous instrumentality, and the entrusted party caused injury to a third party with that instrumentality. The cause of action most frequently arises where one person allows another to drive their automobile.Contents1 General principles1.1 Intersection with criminal law 1.2 Intersection with Evidence law2 Related doctrines2.1 Negligence
Negligence
in employment compared 2.2 Vicarious liability compared3 References 4 Further reading 5 External linksGeneral principles[edit] One of the earliest reported cases under this cause of action, the 1915 Mississippi case of Winn v
[...More...]

"Negligent Entrustment" on:
Wikipedia
Google
Yahoo
Parouse

Negligent Infliction Of Emotional Distress
The tort of negligent infliction of emotional distress (NIED) is a controversial cause of action, which is available in nearly all U.S. states but is severely constrained and limited in the majority of them. The underlying concept is that one has a legal duty to use reasonable care to avoid causing emotional distress to another individual. If one fails in this duty and unreasonably causes emotional distress to another person, that actor will be liable for monetary damages to the injured individual. The tort is to be contrasted with intentional infliction of emotional distress in that there is no need to prove intent to inflict distress
[...More...]

"Negligent Infliction Of Emotional Distress" on:
Wikipedia
Google
Yahoo
Parouse
.