« on: January 10, 2009, 03:57:01 PM »
Madsen v. East Jordan Irrigation Co., 125 P.2d 794 (Utah 1942)
-- This case is the lulz. Vibrations from the defendant's blasting caused the scared plaintiff's minks to eat their babies. The court held that strict liability should not apply because the minks' cannibalism does not ordinarily result from blasting. We read it for the abnormally dangerous activities unit, and talked about information forcing.
Vaughn v. Menlove, 132 Eng. Rep. 490 (C.P. 1837)
-- Citing English cases is tough. C.P. is common pleas, I hope. The defendant built a chimney in a haystack, despite the plaintiff's warnings. The hay caught fire and burned down the plaintiff's property. Although the defendant argued that he should not be held to a reasonable person standard because of his low intelligence, the court held that the defendant should be judged by an objective reasonable person standard. I loled as I read it.
Forster v. Red Top Sedan Service, 257 So.2d 95 (Fla. App. 1972)
-- This was my favorite respondent superior case. The plaintiffs' slow highway driving aggravated the defendant, who drove a Red Top bus. He forced them to stop on the margins, walked over to their car, and slapped both of them. He said that "no old bastard" would "hold him up from getting to the beach." I love how strict liability applies here. I do not see what the company could have done otherwise, besides extending the bus times. (Konradi)
Riss v. City of New York, 240 N.E.2d 860 (N.Y. 1968)
-- This case about special relationships and the police protection duty must be read to be fully appreciated. The facts are almost too stupendous for summary. After Linda Riss broke off an extramarital affair with Burton Pugach, his hired goons threw acid in her face, blinding her. In prison, he sent her love letters. Not only did they marry when he was released, but she served as a character witness in a later assault case against him. The court held that the police did not owe her a duty of protection from the goons. The eloquent dissent argued that New York law against concealed weapons kept her from self-defense, and that tort law, being normative, required the police to pay up.