(no subject)
Apr. 27th, 2004 03:05 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
vicarzDid you ever get the impression that some people study a little too much? I was thinking of bringing in candy for my classmates, which led me to this mental picture - and now I'm thinking I'll just leave the idea at home (and certainly the fictitious bat)!
ESSAY:
A 1L Evening student, José, arrived early for the 2nd semester Torts II exam, along with many of his classmates. While waiting for the exams to be distributed, many of the nervous students wandered about the GMU Atrium - an open area appoximately 3 stories tall lined with glass windows. José decided to treat his fellow classmates in the atrium by sharing a bag of Chocolate Truffles, which were wrapped in plastic and foil. José also brought with him a whiffle bat.
Approximately an hour before the exam, José announced that he had a bag of chocolates. The hungry GMU Law students quickly formed a crowd. Rather than handing out the candy, José instead stood back from the crowd, and used the whiffle-bat to launch the candies into the air above the hungry crowd for them to catch.
Jane Doe, a hungry 1L evening student, saw the crowd of hungry students catching candies. Leaving her books on her chair, she got up and joined the crowd in trying to catch candy. Just as she joined the crowd, José batted another chocolate into the air - one that by multiple witness accounts went approximately 2 floors up before landing in the crowd. Jane jumped up to catch the candy, but missed the candy with her hands, only to have the candy hit her eye. The plastic-foil wrap of the truffle cut her eye, injuring her and causing her to miss the exam.
Although Jane's injuries were not permanent, as a result of the choco-mishap she incurred medical bills, pain & suffering, and had to take a make-up exam during her paid-summer-internship, resulting in a loss of pay.
PART I
1. What is the best argument that José is liable for Jane's injuries?
2. What is Jose's strongest defense?
PART II
Assume now that when Jane reached for the candy, she was jostled by another hungry student, John Deere, as she reached for it.
1. Does John Deere affect Jose's potential liability? Why or why not?
2. What liability does John Deere have, if any, for Jane's injuries?
Let's see, we've got encouragement, confusion as to whether GMULaw students are responsible or free-radicals in the pressence of chocolate, cause in fact, proximate cause, volunteers, assumption of the risk, a concurrent efficient causation twist...
ESSAY:
A 1L Evening student, José, arrived early for the 2nd semester Torts II exam, along with many of his classmates. While waiting for the exams to be distributed, many of the nervous students wandered about the GMU Atrium - an open area appoximately 3 stories tall lined with glass windows. José decided to treat his fellow classmates in the atrium by sharing a bag of Chocolate Truffles, which were wrapped in plastic and foil. José also brought with him a whiffle bat.
Approximately an hour before the exam, José announced that he had a bag of chocolates. The hungry GMU Law students quickly formed a crowd. Rather than handing out the candy, José instead stood back from the crowd, and used the whiffle-bat to launch the candies into the air above the hungry crowd for them to catch.
Jane Doe, a hungry 1L evening student, saw the crowd of hungry students catching candies. Leaving her books on her chair, she got up and joined the crowd in trying to catch candy. Just as she joined the crowd, José batted another chocolate into the air - one that by multiple witness accounts went approximately 2 floors up before landing in the crowd. Jane jumped up to catch the candy, but missed the candy with her hands, only to have the candy hit her eye. The plastic-foil wrap of the truffle cut her eye, injuring her and causing her to miss the exam.
Although Jane's injuries were not permanent, as a result of the choco-mishap she incurred medical bills, pain & suffering, and had to take a make-up exam during her paid-summer-internship, resulting in a loss of pay.
PART I
1. What is the best argument that José is liable for Jane's injuries?
2. What is Jose's strongest defense?
PART II
Assume now that when Jane reached for the candy, she was jostled by another hungry student, John Deere, as she reached for it.
1. Does John Deere affect Jose's potential liability? Why or why not?
2. What liability does John Deere have, if any, for Jane's injuries?
Let's see, we've got encouragement, confusion as to whether GMULaw students are responsible or free-radicals in the pressence of chocolate, cause in fact, proximate cause, volunteers, assumption of the risk, a concurrent efficient causation twist...
