BUSINESS LAW 108 Chapters 3 & 5

Why do we have courts? 1.Impartial way of resolving disputes 2.Procedures to ensure fairness 3.Both sides can present evidence and arguments in their favor 4.Punishments if ultimate decision is not followed 5.System for appealing any errors

Do we really discover the truth? Attorney-client privilege = protects confidential communications between a client and his or her legal adviser for the dominant purpose of legal advice Doctor (or psychotherapist) - patient privilege = protects disclosure of private medical information, especially confidential communications between patient and physician Spousal privilege = (1) a spouse may refuse to testify against the other spouse, and (2) a spouse may refuse to disclose or may prevent the other spouse from disclosing confidential communications between them during marriage Clergy-penitent privilege = either the clergy or the penitent can refuse to disclose the contents of their communications if it was made for the purpose of confession/advice/etc.

Lawsuit (known as a “Complaint”) Example: "Blurred Lines" lawsuit “Blurred lines” vs. “Got to give it up”

Methods of “discovering” facts Deposing witnesses Collecting documents Obtaining written information

Burden of Proof Generally speaking, the plaintiff has the burden to prove each fact that is essential to his or her claim against the defendant. If the plaintiff does not satisfy the burden of proof, the lawsuit will not succeed and the defendant will prevail. In civil lawsuits, the general standard for satisfying the “burden of proof” is called “preponderance of the evidence.” That is a fancy way of saying, “more likely than not” or “better than 50%.”

To prevail on a lawsuit for battery, a plaintiff has to prove with evidence: 1. That the defendant touched the plaintiff or caused the the plaintiff to be touched with the intent to harm or offend; 2. That the plaintiff did not consent to the touching; and 3. That the plaintiff was harmed or offended by the defendant’s conduct. The plaintiff has to prove each one of these three elements by a “preponderance of the evidence.”

Opening statement

Cross-Examination

Closing statement

Civil remedies

How do we calculate ‘damages’?

Punitive damages The goal is to punish, or deter future bad conduct. Most judges will reduce punitive damages to a reasonable level if the jury assessed punitive damages that were too high.

Settlement The most common way for lawsuits to end is through settlement. The parties agree to a mutual resolution (often through payment by the defendant to the plaintiff) and the plaintiff agrees to dismiss the case and never sue again on the same issue.

Appeals

Negligence Negligence is either the failure to do something that an ordinarily prudent person would do under given circumstances, or the doing of something that an ordinarily prudent person would not do under those circumstances. Any lawsuit based on negligence involves a violation of a legal duty, imposed by statute, contract, or otherwise, owed by the defendant to the person injured. Thus, to support a finding of negligence, a plaintiff must show that the defendant owed a duty to the plaintiff to use care, that he or she breached that duty, and that the breach was the actual cause of the resulting injury. This raises many questions. Two of the most important are (1) did the defendant owe a duty of care to the plaintiff, and (2) if so, did the defendant breach its duty of care by failing to act “reasonably”?

Do you owe a legal duty? 1.Steve drives a car in Los Angeles. Does Steve owe a duty of care to other drivers to drive in a safe and reasonable manner? 2.John walks a lot in his city. One day, he sees a man on the other side of the street trip on a broken sidewalk and fall down. Does John owe a duty of care to cross the street in order to help the man who fell down?

Example Adam accepted an invitation from his friend Mike to attend a baseball game. The seats Mike had purchased were very good, a few rows up from the field, and just past first base. Adam had recently immigrated to the United States and knew nothing about baseball. During the game, a player, Brad, hit a ground ball toward third base. The third baseman fielded the ball and threw to the first baseman. Brad thought he was “safe,” but the first base umpire called him “out.” Brad began to argue with the umpire, and in frustration, Brad threw his batting helmet to the ground. The helmet, made of a strong, hard plastic material, bounced on the ground and flew into the stands, striking Adam on the side of the head, causing a serious injury. Adam never saw the helmet coming towards him because he was looking around the stadium at the time rather than at the play on the field. As he was unfamiliar with the game of baseball, he did not know that objects occasionally fly into the stands during a baseball game. If Adam sues for negligence (against either Mike or Brad), what arguments could he make?