Prof. Law & Ethics
77393/06 Spring 2003
01: Jan. 22, 2003

Reading and questions for class 01:

An Overview of the Court Systems
Text pages 167 - 177, 187 - 197 (top).

Sample Cases
Read the following two cases and try to answer the questions.

Aetna v. Jeppesen
1. What was the trial court's finding with respect to product defect?
2. What was the appeal court's conconclusion concerning the trial court's finding with respect to product defect?
3. What was the trial court's finding with respect to crew negligence?
4. What was the appeal court's conconclusion concerning the trial court's finding with respect to crew negligence?
5. The trial was held in a Federal District Court in Navada. Why did the trial court follow California law?
6. What is the doctrine of comparative fault?
7. When the case is back in the trial court, what issue will the court have to resolve?

Winter v. G.P. Putnam's Sons
1. What is the analogy between aeronautical charts and the book about mushrooms?
2. What reasons does the court give for rejecting the analogy?
3. Why does the court refuse the apply the law of product liability to the content of the book?
4. Should writers or publishers who produce information that is wrong or misleading be liable for injuries that result from the use of that information?
5. Should the intended purpose of the information be relevant?
6. Suppose a guide book is intended to provide information on how to cause harm and a purchaser of the book successfully follows the instructions in the book. Should be book's publisher be held responsible for resulting harm?
7. Exactly what does the purchaser of a guide book or navigation chart buy?
8. Who should be responsible for injuries that result from a defective product: the designer, the manufacturer, the seller?

Reading and questions for class 02, Jan 27:

Torts
Text pages 418 - 430.

Triestram v. Way
1. What is judgment non obstante veredicto?
2. What is contributory negligence? How is it relevant to this case?
3. According to the Supreme Court of Michigan, what is the standard of care that is required of one who is suddenly confronted with an emergency?
4. Why did the Supreme Court of Michigan reverse the decision of the trial court?

Dokus v. Palmer
1. What is the duty of care does a common carrier of persons have toward its passengers?
2. The defendant claimed that Sandor was negligent because he stepped off the moving train. The Supreme Court of Connecticut said: "It would be difficult to absolve the deceased from the charge that he was guilty of negligence as matter of law in stepping off a train moving as rapidly as was the one involved in this case." Nevertheless, the Court held that Sandor's negligence did not necessarily absolve the defendant of responsibility for Sandor's death. Why?
3. What is the difference between the duty of care an common carrier is expected to exercise towards its passengers and the duty of care a person is expected to exercise to guard his own safety?

Next page

a01b