Please enable JavaScript.

Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.

Poisoning (Possiblitty of success (The comparative responsability Act-…

- - - - no risk in helping Smith
    - - Considered most important.. Hartsfield, 893 S.W.2d at 150; also: Otis Eng’g, 668 S.W.2d at 309
      - ‘If a party negligently creates a situation, then it becomes his duty to do something about it to prevent injury to others if it reasonably appears or should appear to him that others in the exercise of their lawful rights may be injured thereby.’
        El Chico, 732 S.W.2d at 311
      - Foreseeability means that the actor, as a person of ordinary intelligence, should have anticipated the dangers that his negligent act created for others. Venetoulias v O'brien
    - - how is foregoing a duty benefit society?
    - - the burden was minimal, as he neded only to drive Smith and drop him off to get medical attention.
    - - no negative consequences aside for a small investment of time for Brewer.
    - - Foreseability
        
        Smith negligently created a situation when instead of driving Smith to the hospital he drove to his appartment
        He claimed to be tired
        He made decision for "him to sleep it off."
        He was consious of the need, as he still intended to take him after his nap,
        He put his needs, tired and need a nap, before the needs of a person in harm.
        
        Brewer knew the consequences of food poisoning when he looked up puffer fish ingestion and found the possible outcomes, including death.
      - what are his medical cost and long term needs when wighted against societal costs?-- Allowing Brewer not to perform as he promised causes undue burden on society. S lost wages and ability to contribute are hindered by his injury and might negatively affect his long term ability to earn. NOT to mention medical related cost associated with that nigtht's injuries. the debt incurred can have negative effects on study, work prospects. Will he require medical state assistance for cost resluting form the negligence, or ongoing treatments? society would have been better off if he had kept his promise.
      - Risk
      - magnitude
      - Consequences of burden
    - - likelyhood of injury given
      - Burden
      - Foreseability
        
        Venetoulias negligently created a situation when after O'Brien having ingested large amounts of alcohol he placed her into her vehicle and put her keys into the ignition. Allowing her to drive on her condition.
        
        Venetoulias knew of the consequences of injury to herself by driving when, based on his promises, O'Brien began to consume alcohol. It was foreseable that she would not be able to drive herself since her judgement was impaired, perception distorted, and her ability to react was slowed.
        
        Foreseable that if she drank, as she indicated she would not do, she would not be able to drive.
      - Consequences of that burden
      - Risk
- - - - Rule: one who voluntarily undertaken affirmative course of action for the benefit of another, has the duty to exercise reasonable care that the other person will not be injured thereby. (Fort bend)
        
        Promise made to another taking on duty
        
        Failure of care increases injury
        
        Undertaken to perform promise by the other to a third person
        
        No performance had been initiated by couty. no direct contact or arrangements had begun
        
        Personal Injury to Sbrusch was caused due to failing to repair a water rotten pilon holding up the bridge
        
        1 more item...
        
        Brewer had undertaken the duty of another friend who had offered to take Smith by promising/assuring that he would take him the hospital. This also made Smith forego other options to for aid. Convincing the other party was the begining of his performance, additionally, he had direct contact with smith in ferrying him away form the location where he made the promise. Additionally he continued to care for him and help him to his appartment. if not, he would have left him at the restaurant.
        
        2 more items...
        
        No reliance by injured party
        
        . Performance had not begun. He took S direcly to his appartment, not towards the hospital and changed directions.
        
        1 more item...
        
        Smith was unconsious and could not have possibly inteded to hold promisor accountable to his reliance on perfromance
        
        harm is suffered because of reliance
        
        Is the a liability created when defendant assumed a duty and failed to carry out that duty with reasonable care-questioning in driver case (Fort)
      - Elements: district voluntaryly assumed the duty to repair by the promises made by haik and zebesta. Our Case: Brewer voluntarily assumed duty when he promised/ assured he would take Smith to hospital
    - - Risk
      - Forseability
      - Likely hood of injury v social Utility
      - Magnitude of burden of guarding against burden
      - Consequences of that burden
- - - - ; or if, a) from acting negligently a dangerous situation is created.
        
        Foreseabilty is generally regarded as the most important of these factors
  - - - An actor may abandon his services at any time, irrespective of his motivations fo doing so
        
        Unless, by giving aid, he has put on worse position than he was in before by partial performance, or if in reliance he has foregone other opportunities of obtaining assistance.
        
        Counter: party did not forwent any other opportunities as he as unable to make a concious decision regarding the source of aid.
        
        if none, then imposition
        
        A mere promise to render a service with neithr performance nor reliance imposes no tort obligation upon the promisor(fort)