Sentences with phrase «strict liability rule»

Governmentally - operated zoos are not subject to these strict liability rules, meaning if someone is injured by one of the zoo animals or by an inappropriately - maintained area, the zoo can point to the zoo - goer's negligence as a defense.

Under California law, strict liability rules apply.

This means it combines the one - bite rule with strict liability rules.

Not exact matches

In 2012, the Maryland Court of Appeals ruled that «pit bulls» are «inherently dangerous» and imposed a new strict liability standard on landlords who knew or had reason to know that a tenant has a pit bull on the premises.

The general rules on covenants in securities (which include both stocks and bonds) is one of completeness in which any false statement or any material omission becomes actionable on a strict liability standard, so that there is no forgiveness under Section 11 of the Securities Act of 1933...»

Latin for «knowingly,» the theory behind scienter reflects common law strict liability claims, as well as the one bite rule.

The ruling upheld the dismissal of design defect claims in a suit alleging that certain manufacturers are liable under theories of strict (product) liability and negligence.

New York is considered a «mixed» state, which means that the one - bite rule is mixed with the strict liability law in regard to the state's dog bite statute.

Specific topics covered include the role of the prosecutor, defendant and justice of the peace; the presumption of innocence; proof beyond a reasonable doubt and findings of credibility; elements of an offence; guilty pleas to an offence charged or another offence; mens rea, strict liability and absolute liability offences; defences to regulatory charges, including due diligence, reasonable mistake of fact and officially induced error; trial procedure; presentation of evidence; rules of evidence; the voir dire; dealing with the unrepresented defendant; Charter applications; access to justice issues; paralegals and lawyers in the courtroom; requests for a bilingual trial; articulating reasons for judgment; delivery of a judgment; sentencing; and trials of young persons.

Both Utah and Washington State have strict liability laws that will hold the dog's owner liable for your damages, while Idaho adheres to the one - bite rule.

The traditional doctrine that makes a person liable for harm inflicted by a domestic animal is referred to as «scienter» (the Latin word for «knowingly»), «common law strict liability,» and «the one bite rule.»

Leading the briefing and oral argument in a case watched nationwide, Laurie won a ruling foreclosing strict liability and negligence liability (in most circumstances) for a manufacturer that did not make or sell an injury - causing product foreseeably used with its own.

Keywords: Torts, Nuisance, Trespass, Negligence, Strict Liability (Rylands v. Fletcher (1868), L.R. 3 H.L. 330 (U.K. H.L.)-RRB-, Environmental Contamination, Environmental Protection Act, R.S.O. 1990, s. 99, Civil Procedure, Interveners, Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 13.02, Peel (Regional Municipality) v. Great Atlantic & Pacific Co. of Canada Ltd. (1990), 74 O.R. (2d) 164 (C.A.)

(1) extending negligent misrepresentation beyond «business transactions» to product liability, unprecedented in Texas; (2) ignoring multiple US Supreme Court decisions that express and implied preemption operate independently (as discussed here) to dismiss implied preemption with nothing more than a cite to the Medtronic v. Lohr express preemption decision; (3) inventing some sort of state - law tort to second - guess the defendant following one FDA marketing approach (§ 510k clearance) over another (pre-market approval), unprecedented anywhere; (4) holding that the learned intermediary rule does not apply whenever a defendant «compensates» or «incentivizes» physicians to use its products, absent any Texas state or appellate authority; (5) imposing strict liability on an entity not in the product's chain of sale, contrary to Texas statute (§ 82.001 (2)-RRB-; (6) creating a claim for «tortious interference» with the physician - patient relationship, again utterly unprecedented; (7) creating «vicarious» breach of fiduciary duty for engaging doctors to serve as expert witnesses in mass tort litigation also involving their patients, ditto; and (8) construing a consulting agreement with a physician as «commercial bribery» to avoid the Texas cap on punitive damages, jaw - droppingly unprecedented.

Germany also keeps the roads safe with strict rules, including rigorous vehicle inspections, mandatory third - party liability coverage and a point system that helps keeps dangerous drivers off the road.