enow.com Web Search

  1. Ads

    related to: negligent vs intentional tort california law

Search results

  1. Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
  2. Summers v. Tice - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Summers_v._Tice

    Decided November 17, 1948; Full case name: Charles A. Summers v. Howard W. Tice, et al. Citation(s) 33 Cal.2d 80 199 P.2d 1: Holding; When a plaintiff suffers a single indivisible injury, for which the negligence of each of several potential tortfeasors could have been a but-for cause, but only one of which could have actually been the cause, all the potential tortfeasors are jointly and ...

  3. United States tort law - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_tort_law

    This article addresses torts in United States law. As such, it covers primarily common law. Moreover, it provides general rules, as individual states all have separate civil codes. There are three general categories of torts: intentional torts, negligence, and strict liability torts.

  4. Thing v. La Chusa - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thing_v._La_Chusa

    Thing v. La Chusa , 48 Cal. 3d 644 (1989), was a case decided by the Supreme Court of California that limited the scope of the tort of negligent infliction of emotional distress . The majority opinion was authored by Associate Justice David Eagleson , and it is regarded as his single most famous opinion and representative of his conservative ...

  5. Intentional tort - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intentional_tort

    An intentional tort is a category of torts that describes a civil wrong resulting from an intentional act on the part of the tortfeasor (alleged wrongdoer). The term negligence, on the other hand, pertains to a tort that simply results from the failure of the tortfeasor to take sufficient care in fulfilling a duty owed, while strict liability torts refers to situations where a party is liable ...

  6. Dillon v. Legg - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dillon_v._Legg

    Dillon v. Legg, 68 Cal. 2d 728 (1968), was a case decided by the Supreme Court of California that established the tort of negligent infliction of emotional distress.To date, it is the most persuasive decision of the most persuasive state supreme court in the United States during the latter half of the 20th century: Dillon has been favorably cited and followed by at least twenty reported out-of ...

  7. Tort - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tort

    Dignitary torts are a category of intentional tort affecting the honour, dignity, and reputation of an individual and include: Defamation, [k] invasion of privacy, breach of confidence, torts related to the justice system such as malicious prosecution and abuse of process, and torts pertaining to sexual relations that are considered obsolete in ...

  8. Li v. Yellow Cab Co. - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Li_v._Yellow_Cab_Co.

    Li v. Yellow Cab Co. , 13 Cal.3d 804, 532 P.2d 1226 (1975), commonly referred to simply as Li , is a California Supreme Court case that judicially embraced comparative negligence in California tort law and rejected strict contributory negligence .

  9. Molien v. Kaiser Foundation Hospitals - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molien_v._Kaiser...

    Molien v. Kaiser Foundation Hospitals , 27 Cal. 3d 916 (1980), was a case decided by the Supreme Court of California that first recognized that a "direct victim" of negligence can recover damages for emotional distress without an accompanying physical injury.

  1. Ads

    related to: negligent vs intentional tort california law