Business Law

outcomes

= facts + law

jury shopping

hearing a case in a certain jurisdiction due to likelihood of jury deciding in favor

costs of protecting legal interests

economic, emotional, time, risk/reward

alternative dispute resolutions

disputing parties agree to mediation/arbitration

law

set of rules or conduct adopted by a group

common law

body of law developed throguh judicial decisions

uniform laws

federal gov proposes laws and states choose to accept

restatements

recitations of majority rules of law, suggested by group of experts

law characteristics

predictable, flexible, knowable, reasonable

burden of proof

level of evidence necessary for answer to be “yes” to question on triak

ordinary burden of proof

reasonable certainty based on greater weight of credible evidence

middle ground burden of proof

clear, convincing proof of claims

criminal case burden of proof

beyond a reasonable doubt

jury nullifcation

when jury ignores rules and uses inappropriate considerations

criminal law

violation of laws/statues

contract law

violation of duty imposed by agreements

functions of law

settle disputes, protect property, aid in. exchange of goods/services, protect the state

substantive law

creates, defines, and regulates legal rights and duties

procedural law

sets forth rules for enforcing rights created bu substantive law

stare decisis

precedence in legal decisions

adversary system

legal system in which two disputing parties make case in front of neutral party(judge/jury)

negligence

act that creates unreasonable risk of harm

elements of negligence

duty of care, breach, causation, injury

negligence per se

violation of statue conclusively showing negligence

licensee

person allowed on land with owner’s consent (ex: guest)

invitee

person allowed on individual’s land for business or as member of public

res ipsa loquitor

“the thing that speaks for itself”; rule for circumstantial evidence, allowing jury to infer negligence, requiring defendant to offer explanation

superseding cause

relieves defendant of liability, event after negligent conduct that aids in causing harm

negligence defenses

contributory, comparative, assumption of risk

contributory negligence

conduct by plantiff that falls below standard and legally contributes to own harm

comparative negligence

fault divided between parties by %

assumption of risk

plantiff expressly agrees to assume risk of harm from defendant’s conduct

strict liability

liability without fault, based on nature of activity (includes keeping animals and abnormally dangerous activities)

tort law

allocates losses due to human actions

criminal negligence

negligence to a high degree that actor should realize

vicarious liability

if employee is acting in scope of employment, employer is liable for actions(agency principle)

immunity statues

state you cannot be liable even if negligent (ex: landowner making land available for public use)

proximate cause

foreseeability that action would have casued the outcome

actual cause

did actions cause the victim’s harm

elements of res ipsa loquitor

defendant has control over the situation, event wouldn’t have occured without negligence, defendant doesn’t offer reasonable explanation

several liability

defendant limited to pay recovery equal to % fault assigned

joint and several liability

each defendant can be held liable for all losses suffered by plantiff

modified joint and several

defendant cannot be liable for full amount owed to platiff unless liability exceeds set % (51% in WI)

origins of law

Constitution, statues, regulations, cases

jury’s role

decides matters of fact in case

intentional torts

violate criminal and civil statues, includes defamation, trespassing, and battery

damage cap

legal limit on what jury can award a plantiff for certain types of damage