M7 Discussion

No unread replies.No replies.

Overview

This module introduces you to strict liability as it applies to harmful animals and abnormally dangerous conditions and activities. This discussion activity provides you the opportunity to select from among one of the four Critical Thinking Exercises at the end of Chapter 10.

Instructions

The General Instructions for discussion assignments are incorporated into this weeks discussion assignment. Please read them before posting. Any additional instructions specific to this lesson module are provided below. There are two activities for each discussion board assignment, both with different due dates: (1) initial post; and (2) minimum two replies to classmate posts. Check the Course Syllabus and Schedule of Assignments for due dates. Each discussion has three components: (1) Topic(s) for discussion; (2) Ethics question; and (3) Reflection. Make sure to carefully review and respond to each component. Please give careful attention to the general and additional assignment instructions.

Additional Instructions

• Select from among one of the four Critical Thinking Exercises at the end of Chapter 10 of the textbook.
• Identify the number of the Critical Thinking Exercises you selected in the subject line of your post.
• Use this week's assigned learning materials to post the results of your research.
• If you use assigned or other resources, cite the sources at the end of your post.

Ethics

You work for a law firm that is client-centered in its representation. It is a small firm with three lawyers, two paralegals, a receptionist and administrative assistant.

The firm is representing Sarah, who was seriously injured when a semi-truck trailer collided with her vehicle during an ice storm last year. The truck, traveling east on a two-lane highway, lost control and entered Sarah's side of the highway, hitting her head on. Sarah's vehicle burst into flames. She was hospitalized for six months to treat burns that covered 80% of her body. The impact also caused Sarah to be paraplegic. She is still in treatment for her burns and will undergo more surgeries over the next couple of years.

Sarah is single and 35-years-old. She has two small children. Before the accident, Sarah was a fulltime medication aide for an assisted living long-term residential care facility. She has been unable to work. One of the firm attorneys is assisting Sarah with her application for Social Security Disability benefits. She filed the application on her own and the initial application was denied. One of the firm attorneys has appealed the denial and it may be another 10-12 months before a decision is made on her appeal.

The firm has taken Sarah's personal injury claim on a contingency fee arrangement. It is also assisting with the appeal with an agreement for attorney's fees that do not require an advance fee, but a fee that is approved by the SSA. The firm is advancing costs for court fees, depositions, and expert witness fees, which is customary and permissible under the professional rules of conduct. The fees and costs will be deducted from any settlement or jury award.

Last week, Sarah came to the office sobbing. She exhausted the last of her savings and funds she received from a fundraiser hosted by family and friends. Her car was totaled in the accident and the money she received from the driver's insurance was not enough to pay off the loan on her car, leaving her with nothing to purchase a vehicle equipped for someone who is paraplegic. Liability is clear, but the damages Sarah suffered is disputed. The firm is trying to get Sarah the best possible financial outcome in her case. She asks the attorney if she can borrow against any settlement or jury award. Alternatively, she wants to know if she can just settle the case to get $50,000 to have money to get a handicap accessible vehicle and apartment for herself and her children.

The firm already has $20,000 outstanding in allowable prepaid costs. Sarah already has more than $500,00 in medical bills. The attorneys value her case at more than $2 million. Sarah doesn't want to wait. She needs money, now.

You overheard the attorneys discussing whether they can loan Sarah money to get by until there is a settlement or judgment. You reviewed Neb. Ct. R. of Prof. Cond. 3-501.8Links to an external site..

Can the attorneys loan Sarah money to pay living expenses and get a handicap accessible vehicle until there is a settlement or jury award?

Reflection

Many legislatures have enacted laws that make owners of domesticated animals strictly liable for injuries caused by the animals. Although the common law historically followed the "one dog bite rule," strict liability statutes make the owner liable for injuries. These statues also remove the requirement of "scienter," meaning, that the owner knew or had reason to know of the animal's dangerous propensity. The textbook discusses various defenses that may apply to a dog bite statute. The Nebraska "Dog Bite StatuteLinks to an external site." is provided in the module materials and resources and is linked in this reflection, and except for a trespasser, makes the owner or owners of any dog liable for all damages caused by a dog bite. What are your personal thoughts about strict liability dog bite statutes? Did you know before taking this course you are liable to licensees and invitees to your home who might be injured by your pet? No one ever thinks their loving pet is capable of biting someone, until it happens. If you are a pet owner, how can you protect yourself from liability?