1. Home
  2. Flashcards
  3. Preview

POLS_3301 - 2.txt

  1. The traditional rule for torts was ____ ____.
    strict liabilty
  2. What were the 2 ways to sue under the pre-industrial torts
    • 1. trespass (direct injury)
    • 2. trespass on the case (indirect injuries)
  3. If you were injured directly or indirectly before 1850 could you recover
    yes -always
  4. What is one case that showed indirect injuries you could recover in pre-industrial
    Patton v. Halstead
  5. What was Patton v. Halstead about
    sheriff letting prisioner out and being held responsible for his debt
  6. What happened to change neg. standard
    industrial revolution
  7. why did negl. standard have to change
    because RR would not have thrived if being sued constantly
  8. What are the 3 major changes during the rise of the neg. standards
    • 1. Doctrine of Statutory Authority
    • 2. Contribuitory negligence
    • 3. assumption of risk
  9. In Lexingtong & Ohio RR v. Applegate why did the courts say the RR could continue operating regardless of nuisance
    because they had authority to operate from govt.
  10. Statutory Authority says what
    given permission to operate from govt.
  11. What was Lexington & Ohio RR v. Applegate about
    RR being sued for nuisance and ct saying no they have statutory authority
  12. Statutory authority was also applied to ____ cases
    tort
  13. Which case was about stopping RR nuisances
    Lexington & Ohio RR v. Applegate
  14. Which case was about RR burning down a mill
    Burroughs v. Housatoric RR Co
  15. What was Burroughs v. Housatoric RR about
    burning down mill and court saying RR not at fault because they had statutory authority
  16. What 4 things immunized companies from accidents
    • 1. statutory authority
    • 2. contributory negligence
    • 3. assumption of risk
    • 4. change from trespass to no absolute fault torts
  17. What is one case about contributory negligence
    Haring v. NY and Erie RR
  18. What was Haring v. NY and Erie RR about
    carriage hit by train, both at fault so he could not recover
  19. Accidents at work also got changed, workers have an __ of __
    assumption of risk
  20. Which case was about assumption of risk
    Farwell v. Boston and Worcester RR
  21. Farwell v. Boston and Worcester RR was about what
    workers having an assumption of risk
  22. Workers having an assumption of risk changed the common law doctrine of ___ _____
    respondant superior
  23. Holmes Doctrine on The Common Law states that ___ by ___ ___ ____ ___ ___ ____
    loss by accident must lie where it falls
  24. Who said loss by accident must lie where it falls
    Holmes, the common law doctrine
  25. What case made it cheaper to kill someone than to scratch them
    Casey v. Berkshire RR
  26. Casey v. Berkshire was important why
    made it cheaper to kill than to scratch, but eventually set up wrongful death lawsuits
  27. What was the one case that the people and legislatures did not agree with and changed in future
    casey v. berkshire
Author
marioavarela
ID
51783
Card Set
POLS_3301 - 2.txt
Description
Negligence
Updated

  1. Home
  2. Flashcards
  3. Preview