Day on Torts

FEBRUARY 24, 2022

The only issue in this personal injury case was damages. Plaintiff and his experts also testified that plaintiff suffered a traumatic brain injury in the accident. The Court ruled that this was sufficient material evidence from which the jury could find a permanent injury in this case.

Tort 59

Tort Personal Injury Court Court Rules 59

JonathanTurley

OCTOBER 10, 2022

A tragedy in North Carolina could present rather difficult torts questions in a wrongful death case for a grieving family. The court ruled for Google: “I conclude that it does not require the imposition of a duty. She was seriously injured after being struck by an automobile that was negligently driven by Harwood.

Tort 37

Tort Personal Injury Legal Legal 37

JonathanTurley

OCTOBER 31, 2023

The result is a wicked brew of negligence, product defects, intentional torts, and every other tort and crime known above the netherworld. So without further ado, here are this year’s spookiest of torts. Both Kelly and Rando sued for torts ranging from assault to intentional infliction of emotional distress.

Tort 46

Tort Lawyer Lawyers Personal Injury Lawyer 46

JonathanTurley

OCTOBER 30, 2023

Here is my annual list of Halloween torts and crimes. Halloween of course remains a holiday seemingly designed for personal injury lawyers around the world and this year’s additions show why. Halloween has everything for a torts-filled holiday: battery, trespass, defamation, nuisance, product liability and more.

Tort 49

Tort Litigation Litigating Manufacturing 49

JonathanTurley

AUGUST 25, 2021

The case is brought under statutes like 18 U.S.C. 2255, “Civil Remedy for Personal Injuries,” which provides that any person who is a victim of a violation of child pornography may recover the actual damages or liquidated damages in the amount of $150,000 per victim, and reasonable attorney’s fees. In 2002, the U.S.

Personal Injury 48

Personal Injury Court Rules Tort Statute 48

ClimateChange-ClimateLaw

JUNE 8, 2021

Supreme Court held that the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals erred when it concluded that its review of the remand order in Baltimore’s climate change case against fossil fuel companies was limited to determining whether the defendants properly removed the case under the federal officer removal statute.

Court 42

Court Statute Government Litigation 42