About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

Case Citations [i] (July 2016 through April 2017)

handle is hein.ali/restt5023 and id is 1 raw text is: TORTS 3D: APPORTIONMENT OF LIABILITY TOPIC 1. BASIC RULES OF COMPARATIVE RESPONSIBILITY § 8. Factors for Assigning Shares of Responsibility N.Y.Sup.Ct.App.Div.2016. Com. (c) quot. in diss. op. City sanitation worker filed a personal-injury action against city, alleging that he was injured when a sanitation truck backed into a parked vehicle that then struck him. The trial court denied plaintiff s motion for summary judgment, finding that plaintiff failed to establish that he was free from comparative fault. Affirming, this court held that a trier of fact could determine that defendant was free from negligence and that plaintiff was 100% at fault in causing his injuries, in light of evidence offered by defendant. The dissent cited Restatement Third of Torts: Apportionment of Liability § 8 in arguing that, although the doctrine of comparative negligence was inapplicable where a plaintiff s conduct was the sole proximate cause of the plaintiff's injuries, plaintiff made a prima facie showing of defendant's negligence, and thus it was for a jury to determine the percentage of fault attributable to plaintiff, if any. Rodriguez v. City of New York, 37 N.Y.S.3d 93, 108. TOPIC 2. LIABILITY OF MULTIPLE TORTFEASORS FOR INDIVISIBLE HARM § 11. Effect of Several Liability Ariz.2016. Cit. in case quot. in sup. After passenger sued motorist who allegedly injured her in a rear- end accident, motorist filed a notice naming passenger's surgeon as a nonparty at fault, asserting that surgeon performed a medically unnecessary spinal-fusion surgery on passenger after the accident that exacerbated her condition. The trial court granted physician's motion for partial summary judgment to strike the notice based on the original tortfeasor rule. After the court of appeals declined jurisdiction, this court reversed and remanded, holding that the original tortfeasor rule did not did not preclude a defendant from alleging or proving, or a trier of fact from considering and finding, fault of a nonparty physician who treated the plaintiff for injuries allegedly sustained from the defendant's tort. The court cited Restatement Third of Torts: Apportionment of Liability § 11 in noting that modem adoption of pure several liability limited the liability of each defendant liable for the same harm to that defendant's comparative share of the harm, and thus did not require or imply any change to the original tortfeasor rule. Cramer v. Starr, 375 P.3d 69, 75. § 12. Intentional Tortfeasors C.A.7, 2016. Quot. in case quot. in disc. In affirming the district court's judgment on a jury verdict awarding casino owners damages against horse-racetrack owners who bribed the state's governor to sign a bill to tax casinos for the benefit of the horseracing industry, this court declined to consider as untimely defendants' argument that they were liable, at most, for the taxes levied between the day the governor signed the bill and the day the bill would have become law anyway under the state's 60-day A L\ I For earlier citations, see the Appendices, Supplements, or Pocket Parts, if any, that correspond to the subject matter under examination.

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most