Shopping Bag

0 item(s) in cart/ total: $0    view cart
Free Instant Delivery  |  No Sales Tax
Home > Case Law > Torts  >  Standard Negligency Jury Instruction
Standard Negligency Jury Instruction
Standard Negligency Jury Instruction Cartoons

Standard Negligency Jury Instruction

Bjorndal v. Weitman; person negligent if person fails exercise reasonable care measured by what reasonable person acting with ordinary prudence would do under the same or similar circumstances including emergencies.
Your Price: $10.00

Select Usage (details) :

Related Cartoons

Damage Limits in Maritime Cases
Damage Limits in Maritime Cases
Exxon Shipping Co. v. Baker; In maritime cases, compensatory and punitive damages should be limited to a 1:1 ratio.; malice; remittur.
Stepparent Immunity for Negligent Supervision
Stepparent Immunity for Negligent Supervision
Zellmer v. Zellmer; Because a stepparent standing in loco parentis has a common law duty to support and educate a child to the same extent as a biological parent, he or she is also entitled to parental immunity for negligent supervision.
Student Acting Under Doctor Authority Does Not Commit Battery
Student Acting Under Doctor Authority Does Not Commit Battery
Mullins v. Parkview Hospital, Inc; In order to state a claim for battery, the plaintiff must show that the defendant acted intending to cause a harmful or offensive contact with the plaintiff.
Security Guards May Pursue Fleeing Suspects
Security Guards May Pursue Fleeing Suspects
Peters v. Menard, Inc; A merchant and its agents are immune from liability for actions taken while attempting to detain a person, including off-premises pursuit of that person, if reasonable cause to believe person violated the shoplifting law.
Schools Have a Duty to Protect Students
Schools Have a Duty to Protect Students
Christensen v. Royal School District No. 160; Contributory fault may not be assessed against thirteen-year-old child based on failure to protect from sexual abuse when defendant stands in special relationship to child and has duty to protect child.
Design Defect
Design Defect
Merck & Co. v. Garza; Courts should allow a party to present the best available evidence and only then should determine from a totality of the evidence, considering all factors, whether there is legally sufficient evidence to support judgment.
Chain Of Causation
Chain Of Causation
Virden v. Betts and Beer Constr. Co.. Defendant's conduct is the proximate cause of a plaintiff's injury only if injury would not have occurred but for the defendant's conduct and was a substantial factor. But-for cause; substantial factor test.
Slip and Fall Damages
Slip and Fall Damages
Averyt v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.; Where the jury's damages award is supported by the evidence, a reviewing court will not reverse it.
Loss of Chance Doctrine
Loss of Chance Doctrine
Mohr v. Grantham; treating the loss of chance as a cognizable injury permits plaintiffs to recover for the loss of an opportunity for a better outcome. But for causation. Substantial Factor Test.
Intervening Cause
Intervening Cause
Pohl v. County of Furnas; an intervening cause cuts off a tortfeasor's liability only when it is not foreseeable; tthe new and independent conduct of a third person is itself the proximate cause of the injury and breaks the causal connection.
Risk Standard
Risk Standard
Thompson v. Kaczinski; a actor's liability is limited to those physical harms that result from the risks that made the actor's conduct tortious. The scope of liability issue is fact intensive as to foreseeability.
Child Liability in Tort
Child Liability in Tort
Van Camp v. McAfoos; A child cannot be held liable in tort without some allegation of negligence or wrongful conduct on his or her part.