Homework 3 Assignment Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 250 words

Homework 3 - Assignment Example Hatfill and spoilt his good name as a doctor and biomedical researcher, and thereby constituted, discretely, defamation, defamation per se, and defamation by fake light." To add, the complaint suspected that Kristofs "intentional public criticism of Dr. Hatfill as the likely anthrax assassin regardless of whether Dr. Hatfill was culpable or not guilty" constituted purposeful infliction of emotional suffering. The court’s ruling does not seem to favor one value over the other because all claims were dealt with as per the law. The case is largely dependent on the use of particular terms since it has so many terms being defined to enable the reader to understand a particular term being used. The definitions used are impeccable in that they clearly simplifies this terms which makes it easier to understand. 2) What assumption allows for existing entities to be held responsible for the actions of deceased individuals? Especially in a case such as this, in which the plaintiff was present as a matter of random chance – a situation out of control of those now held responsible-what reasoning allows for assignment of culpability? Existing entities can be held responsible for the actions of the deceased because when Charles Scarlett told Lourecy that his wife was having a seizure, Lourecy took off her phone to ask for help this might have led to Charles Scarlett shooting his wife and later shooting himself while looking directly at Lourecy. Mrs. Palsgraf should not be awarded the damages because the relationship of the guards doings to Palsgrafs harm was not direct to make him accountable. I am convinced with the court’s ruling because it was difficult for the guard to have known that the wrap up was unsafe and that pushing the traveler would thereby cause a