Hi Tutor, this is a law school work ( Tort ). which I am unable to understand. can you please explain this in simple words. ( simple but detailed answer appreciated) Teacher wants me to write 2 policy consequences from the case Musivand vs David ( It is a Tort case) that could result from the mussivand decision. 1 policy consequence should be from the option. ( need to write page and line also where we found it and what we have identified. 2nd policy consequence should the one that you think of yourself. it can be good or bad effect. for further clearance please see the attachment below. Thanks

Writing Exercise: Policy Consequences of Judge-Made Law In Mussivand, Judge Resnick claims that good results will follow from the decision of the court. Not just a victory for the party who prevailed, Dr. M., but policy consequences that improve life for the public. Here "policy consequences" means effects for the larger society in the future. In this course, we can assume that these consequences implicate wealth or health or both. Health and wealth are related, as the Mussivand court notes (see p. 8, line 30: "the health of the people is an economic asset"). To see the point in the other duty case of Class 2: One policy consequence that can be attributed to MacPherson v. Buick Motor Co. is enhanced safety. In principle, if a product manufacturer knows that a court can compel it to pay damages when it concludes that a product was unreasonably dangerous, and that privity won't keep this manufacturer from being hauled into court, it has an incentive to proceed with reasonable care in making the product. Reasonable care lessens danger. That's health. Assignment: Identify two separate policy consequences that could result from the Mussivand decision and put them in your own words as follows: The first such contention should be one that's made in the opinion but stated in your words: What does Resnick imply can be expected to happen after the holding of the case is accepted and understood by the public? Indicate the page and line(s) in the decision where you found what you've identified. The second contention about a policy consequence should be one that you think of yourself. It can be a good or a bad effect. Speculate thoughtfully: what you come up with should be plausible but it needs no research. Rules: Minimum 175 words, maximum 300. One paragraph for each argument will suffice. Not a formal memo-no need to write an introduction, conclusion, or summary of the case facts