Tort Law
Case 8-1
Critical thinking
Hancock’s clients/potential clients were affected by the dispute. Some of the clients that trusted Hancock must have doubted the services they received and worry about their wellbeing. Partners of Hancock were also affected as they had to incur the cost of compensating Variyam.
Ethical Decision making
In deciding such a case, I would weigh the clients more because how they perceive a physician determines whether their stay in the profession will be great or unfavorable. The essence of maintaining a good reputation is to attract customers; therefore, in deciding on such a case, more attention should be channeled to clients.
Case 8-2
Critical thinking
For the plaintiff to prevail, CenturyLink should have at least accepted a payment from Olson and failed to deliver.
Ethical Reasoning
The court found the plaintiffs’ actions to be frivolous and did not have a legal basis. The plaintiff cannot claim the business failed to deliver an expected service because there was no communication that CenturyLink would deliver.
Case 8-3
Critical Thinking
If there were evidence to show the Mazda was not in good shape and had some mechanical issues, the justice would have overturned the judgment.
Ethical decision making
Alabama’s policy allows punitive damages to punish the defendant and prevent them from repeating such a deed in the future.
Case 10-1
Critical Thinking
There is no difference if a jury or judge decides the foreseeability of a situation. The law would require the involvement of a jury to determine the community standards and expectations with respect to the law.
Ethical decision making
The foreseeability of a situation should dictate how much a manufacturer has a duty of care to a user.