Sentences with phrase «legal duty to a plaintiff»

There must be proof that defendant violated some legal duty to plaintiff, so that plaintiff is in fact the victim and not just the jilted party.

The issue in the case on appeal was whether the plaintiff's medical negligence claim against Dr. Sweet, an expert witness, retained by plaintiff's adversary in the pending litigation, owed a legal duty to the plaintiff.

Not exact matches

On April 8 and 9, 2010, and all material times, Hamilton and Cassels Brock owed a fiduciary duty and duty of good faith to the Plaintiff, and were obligated to act with regard to the Plaintiffs interests and keep and protect the Plaintiffs confidences as a result of the relationship that existed as between the Plaintiff, Hamilton and Cassels Brock, including as a result of the legal advice that had been provided by Hamilton and Cassels Brock to the Plaintiff on or about April 7, 2010 at a time when the Plaintiff was vulnerable and dependent upon Hamilton and Cassels Brock and relying upon their professional advice.

The defendant failed to fulfill his / her legal duty that was owed to the plaintiff (driving safely)

An interesting case from the Massachusetts Appeals Court on an issue of first impression in the state, ruling that there is no legal duty of reasonable care owed by a defendant to a plaintiff who was injured during their consensual sexual conduct.

The Court of Appeals further held that even though the Housing Authority of Baltimore City had a legal duty to inspect properties for deteriorating lead paint, the plaintiffs still had a duty to comply with the notice requirements of the Maryland Local Tort Claims Act.

The plaintiff must prove that the defendant agreed to accept the client's legal matter and neglected the duty that they owed to the client.

[Note 8] In fact, perhaps because this legal principle was so well known, the plaintiff did not claim that the landlord had any duty to clear the snow and ice from the steps in the passageway.

Therefore, in declaring that the landlord in Woods had no duty to the plaintiff «to remove from the steps the ice and snow which naturally accumulated thereon,» id., the court simply applied the general legal principle prevailing at the time that a landlord was not responsible to remove an obstruction he did not cause or create.

Formally, to establish a claim for negligence, the victim must demonstrate: (1) the defendant had a legal duty to conform to a certain standard of conduct; (2) the defendant breached that duty; and (3) the plaintiff sustained damage that was proximately caused by the defendant's breach.

The plaintiff will also need to establish that the defendant's failure to meet its duty of care was a cause of your child's injuries and that your child suffered legal damages as a result of those injuries.

Instead, the Court held that under Rhode Island law, the existence of a duty of care is determined on a case - by - case basis considering the following factors: (1) the foreseeability of the harm; (2) the degree of certainty of injury; (3) the closeness of connection between the defendant's conduct and the plaintiff's injury; (4) the policy of preventing future harm; (5) the burden to the defendant and consequences to the community in imposing a legal duty; and (6) the relationship between the parties.

Both are issues raised by the defense, the main difference is while comparative negligence involves the allowance of a court finding that numerous parties contributed to the initial injury and therefore share liability damages, the avoidable consequences doctrine asserts plaintiff had a duty to prevent further injury after the the initial legal wrong occurred.

For example, your plaintiff ICBC lawyer will explain to you that you are under a legal duty to mitigate your damages by taking reasonable and active steps to rehabilitate yourself.

The ruling further says the plaintiffs failed to identity a valid public policy to create a legal relationship giving rise to a duty, and that Arizona law has removed foreseeability from the duty framework and thus can't be used to establish duty.

[54] It was Cardill's position that once he informed the plaintiffs that he had discovered Mr. Good may have been negligent and instructed the plaintiffs to obtain legal advice elsewhere, his duty to them on this matter was finished.

In order to prove liability, the plaintiff must show that there was a legal duty owed to them, that it was breached by the actions of the defendant, and that it resulted in damages.