Negligent Discipline

631 Words2 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: Torts negligence questions

In discussing negligent failure to discipline and explaining how Criminal Justice agencies can limit their liability. In order to discuss negligent failure to discipline, you have to understand what negligent failure means. Negligent failure is not taking care of someone or something, the result of which is harm to that person or thing. Negligent is failure to exercise the care toward others which a reasonable or prudent person would do in the circumstances, or taking action which such a reasonable person would not. Negligence is accidental as distinguished from intentional torts or from crimes, but a crime can also constitute negligence, such as reckless driving. Negligence can result in all types of accidents causing physical and/or property damage, but can also include business errors and miscalculations, such as a sloppy land survey. In making a claim for damages based on an allegation from another's negligence, the injured party must prove that the party alleged to be negligent had a duty to the injured party-specifically to the one injured or to the general public, that the defendant's action was negligent not what a reasonably prudent person would have done, that the damages were caused by the negligence. Discipline also means accepting punishments for violation. Liability for negligence is a civil matter. In liability negligence, the victim has to be able to prove that the defendant has legal obligations, and the obligations was breached, and that they have received foreseeable harm as a consequence of the negligence alleged. If the victim can prove that there was a breach of a legal obligation then he/she will be awarded damages based on the basis of the harm caused or loss sustained. Many agencies have policies in pl... ... middle of paper ... ...ncident to his supervisor because he knew that if a written complaint was not filed, the Department would not investigate. Parrish filed a written complaint with the Police Department. Luckie later was charged with rape and pleaded guilty to first degree sexual abuse. Parrish filed suit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) against Luckie in his individual and official capacities, and against then Police Chief Bruce in his official capacity. The jury found Luckie liable in his official capacity and awarded damages of $150,000. The jury also found Chief Bruce liable in his official capacity and awarded damages of $50,000. The district court rejected appellant's motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict and this appeal followed. The City raises several issues on appeal. References: Parish v. Luckie, 963 F. 2d 201 (Ark. Ct. App. 1992). 42 U.S. C. 1983 (2000).

Show More
Related

  • tort of negligent investigation

    1025 Words  | 3 Pages

    As police officers own right to carry out an investigation on the suspect, public arise concerning on negligent investigation. In the Hill v. Hamiton-Wentworth case, Mr. Hill was accused robbery and then was proved innocent. Mr. Hill filled a lawsuit against police officers on the tort of negligent investigation, and the Supreme Court of Canada dismissed Hill’s appeal. Moreover, a majority of the court recognizes there is a tort of negligent investigation in Canada, but Mr. Hill was investigated under code of care and no tort of negligent investigation during his investigation. While the argument of minority believes the tort of negligent investigation should be recognized in Canada, and the police had been negligent, the argument of minority is more compelling than majority.

    Read More

  • Whataburger Case Study

    813 Words  | 2 Pages

    Dean filed a suit against Whataburger, Inc alleged the company’s negligence was the proximate cause of the murder of Mr. Dean. The defendant denied the claimant’s allegation mentioning there was a lack of evidence to prove it as a negligent act. The trial court granted summary court for Whataburger, holding that shooting death of a Dean was not foreseeable event and Barton appealed.

    Read More

  • Should Children Behaved When Children Misbehave?

    1305 Words  | 3 Pages

    A family is referred to me because the parents have been using excessive punishment with their son and daughter. Whenever their children misbehave at school or at home the father beats them with a belt all over their legs and back and the mother does not beat them with a belt or other objects but she will slap them in the face if they are out of line or she will refuse to let them eat for a whole day if they do not do their chores or if they have a temper tantrum. The parents are wanting to change and find better ways to punish their children when they misbehave because they are at risk for losing their children to Child Protective Services if they do not change their forms of punishment. Both the Mother and Father were raised in a household where their parents used excessive punishment and they do not know any other way to punish their children. They also have no knowledge of the fact that they can change the behaviors of their children in a positive way by using the appropriate forms of extinction, punishments and reinforcements. I would then define, explain and give examples of extinction, punishment and negative reinforcement to the parents to make sure that this excessive punishments does not happen again. I would ask the parents what some of the triggers are and discipline problems that they are experiencing from their children to cause them to resort to using excessive punishments. I would then use those behavior problems such as temper tantrums and the children not doing their daily chores without being told to do so to be able to come up with an action plan to try and help the parents change those negative behaviors in their children in a positive way.

    Read More

  • Mcdonald's Case Of Stella Liebeck And The Chain Food Restaurant Mcdonalds

    1567 Words  | 4 Pages

    Intentional torts result when the tortfeasor act intentionally with the intend that the consequences of his/her action would be harmful. Negligent torts result when the breach of the duty of all persons, as established by start tort law, to act reasonably and to exercise a reasonable amount of care in their dealings and interactions with others occurs. Strict liability tort is without any fault, but causes danger or serious harm to the society or person involved (Lau, T. & Johnson, L.

    Read More

  • Negligence Case Study

    935 Words  | 2 Pages

    Negligence, as defined in Pearson’s Business Law in Canada, is an unintentional careless act or omission that causes injury to another. Negligence consists of four parts, of which the plaintiff has to prove to be able to have a successful lawsuit and potentially obtain compensation. First there is a duty of care: Who is one responsible for? Secondly there is breach of standard of care: What did the defendant do that was careless? Thirdly there is causation: Did the alleged careless act actually cause the harm? Fourthly there is damage: Did the plaintiff suffer a compensable type of harm as a result of the alleged negligent act? Therefore, the cause of action for Helen Happy’s lawsuit will be negligence, and she will be suing the warden of the Peace River Correctional Centre, attributable to vicarious liability. As well as, there will be a partial defense (shared blame) between the warden and the two employees, Ike Inkster and Melvin Melrose; whom where driving the standard Correction’s van.

    Read More

  • Examples Of Tort Of Negligence

    1171 Words  | 3 Pages

    Negligence is a concept that was passed from Great Britain to the United States. It arose out of common law, which is made up of court decisions that considered whether a defendant had an obligation to act with greater care. It is conduct which falls below the standard established by law for the protection of others against unreasonable risk of harm and involves a failure to fulfill a duty that causes injury to another. Many torts depend on whether there was intent but negligence does not. Negligence looks to see whether the person had a duty to act with care. It emphasizes the need for people to act reasonably in society. This is important because accidents will happen. Negligence helps the law establish whether these accidents could have been avoided, if there was a breach of duty to act reasonably, and if that breach was the cause of injury to that person. By focusing on the conduct rather than the intent of the defendant, the tort of negligence reflects society’s desire to

    Read More

  • FDDSF

    1398 Words  | 3 Pages

    In order to gain a firm understanding of how strict liability strikes a balance between regulatory offences and the criminal law principle of moral blameworthiness, an in depth understanding how strict liability differs from the other regulatory offences needs to be established. Strict and absolute liability involves the Crown proving that a regulatory offence had occurred beyond a reasonable doubt without determining the fault element. True crimes on the other hand ensures that mens rea be established in order to convict the accused. The primary goal of strict liability is to establish that the individual’s actions were negligent and that they did not practice due diligence. Due diligence refers to a person’s ability to take “an active and reasonable attempt to prevent the commission of the prohibited act (Roach, 221).” It is through these differences that strict liability allows for the accused to prove that they exercised reasonable judgment and attempted to reduce negligence.

    Read More

  • Examples Of Contributory Negligence

    103 Words  | 1 Pages

    Contributory negligence occurs during a case when the defendant claims that the claimant contributed to their injuries. If the claimant contributed to their injuries from their own negligence, then their claim in damages could get reduced. One example of contributory negligence could be an accident on a road in which the person injured by the car decides to walk across the road knowing that it could cause harm to themselves as well as others, if the person injured decided to go to court to file a claim for damages their claim could get reduced as they were partially at fault for the accident.

    Read More

  • The Ingredients Required to Establish the Tort of Negligence

    1790 Words  | 4 Pages

    The tort of Negligence is defined by Winfield as, ‘as breach of a legal duty to take care which results in damage to the claimant’ . To bring an action in the tort of negligence it’s not enough to prove that defendant behaved carelessly. It is just one of the ingredients required to establish the tort of negligence, the claimant must prove that the defendant owes the claimant a duty of care. The defendant has acted in breach of that duty and as a result of that breach, the claimant has suffered damage which is not too remote a consequence of the defendant’s breach. As it was observed in Heaven v Pender ‘Action in negligence must fail where a duty is not established’

    Read More

  • Respondent's Claim In Negligence

    660 Words  | 2 Pages

    Liability for negligence does not depend on just causation of the injury to the plaintiff, it depends on an issue of fault, and the reasoning which justifies a lower standard of care as the test of the existence of fault in the case of children also justifies a lower standard of care as the test for the existence of fault in the case of persons of unsound mind.

    Read More

  • random liability law

    1402 Words  | 3 Pages

    Negligence is the doing of something which a reasonably prudent person would not do, or the failure to do something which a reasonably prudent person would do, under circumstances similar to those shown by the evidence.It is the failure to use ordinary or reasonable care.Ordinary or reasonable care is that care which persons of ordinary prudence would use in order to avoid injury to themselves or others under circumstances similar to those shown by the evidence. The person whose conduct we set up as a standard is not the extraordinarily cautious individual, nor the exceptionally skillful one, but a person of reasonable and ordinary prudence.One test that is helpful in determining whether or not a person was negligent is to ask and answer the question whether or not, if a person of ordinary prudence had been in the same situation and possessed of the same knowledge, he or she would have foreseen or anticipated that someone might have been injured by or as a result of his or her action or inaction. If the answer to that question is "yes", and if the action or inaction reasonably could have been avoided, then not to avoid it would be negligence.

    Read More

  • Essay On Professional Negligence

    1585 Words  | 4 Pages

    Tort laws cover violations where the party intentionally harmed the other person. Negligence, simply put, is the failure to take proper care of something. Professional negligence relates to a professional occupation that has a duty of care to its clients, where the professional has been neglectful in his duties and the client has consequently suffered some form of loss, in most cases physical or financial. Professional negligence arises when the professional you have engaged to provide a service fails in their duty to provide that service through negligence. In order to prove that a professional is negligent, it is necessary to establish that no reasonably competent professional, in the relevant field, at the relevant time, with the same qualifications and expertise, faced with the same circumstances, would have acted in the same way.

    Read More

  • Negligence Case Study

    1660 Words  | 4 Pages

    1. a. When a person is injured in a careless way and causes another person to be injured, under the principle of "negligence", the careless person will be liable for the injury. The basis for this assessment and identification of the fault is in most cases involving accident or injury disputes, in informal settlement negotiations, and through the trial of a personal injury lawsuit.

    Read More

  • Libel

    758 Words  | 2 Pages

    Negligence is a situation in which harm is caused by accident, and strict liability is where harm is done, but one is responsible without proof of carelessness or blame. In tort cases, the injured party can seek compensatory damages, which could include medical expenses, lost income, pain and suffering, and more. An injured party might also seek punitive damages, which are designed to punish the person at fault or prevent the same thing from happening again. There are many different areas of intentional torts that can arise from an act of intent. Some of these torts committed against a person are battery, assault, false imprisonment, fraud, defamation, and others.

    Read More

  • Essay On Contributory Negligence

    350 Words  | 1 Pages

    Negligence is conduct that creates risk of harm to someone, it may cause another person injury. To succeed in a negligence claim, the plaintiff must prove negligence the defendant owed as a duty toward the plaintiff. The plaintiff must show how the defendant failed to act in a reasonable way, or breached their duty and how the defendant's breach is the cause of someone’s injuries (n.d., 2016).

    Read More

More about Negligent Discipline

Open Document