Who Can Janelle Sue And Under What Theory Of Liability? Who Can Melissa Sue?

/in /by
WHO CAN JANELLE SUE AND UNDER WHAT THEORY OF LIABILITY? WHO CAN MELISSA SUE? By David B. Lupoff, Esq.
 
Melissa had just purchased a self-driving car from Tesla. As the Tesla was cruising down Santa Monica Blvd towards Melissa’s favorite destination, Third Street Promenade, Melissa was texting her friend, planning a party for Melissa’s brother. Suddenly, a car ran a red light right in front of the Tesla, which caused the Tesla to slam into the side of the violating car, knocking the violating car onto the sidewalk, striking Janelle, who had just made a bank deposit for her boss. Janelle suffered a broken back. In addition, the force of the impact caused Melissa an aortic dissection, which lead to a neurological injury which stemmed from the bleeding. Had Melissa been driving the Tesla herself, she would have been able to spot the violating car from far away, giving her the opportunity to stop, potentially avoiding the collision. Melissa did not pay attention to the road because she relied on the automatic driving features of the Tesla.

Who Can Tammy Successfully Sue? List The Potential Defendants

/in /by
David B. Lupoff, Esq. Personal Injury and workers’ comp. 1-877-505-INJURY
 
While Tammy was at a stop light in her 4 year old Totoya car, she was sending a text message to her boyfriend who lived in Ohio. Jerry, who was stopped behind Tammy was in a self-driving Uber car. Suddenly, the automated Uber car malfunctioned, causing it to roll into Tammy’s rear bumper at 3 mph which triggered Tammy’s airbag to deploy, violently thrusting her cell phone into her face, resulting in severe, permanent disability. While Tammy was in the hospital, she immediately hired an attorney after watching a lawyer commercial. A month after retaining her attorney, her insurance company had her airbag replaced. Tammy eventually filed a lawsuit against Uber, and the automaker that supplied Uber with the automated car.
 
Approximately 3 months after the accident, Tammy’s friend, who’d recently passed the bar exam told Tammy that her lawyer screwed up.
 
Bonus question: Was there some sort of spoliation of the evidence?

LEGAL QUIZ #01

/in /by

LEGAL QUIZ – How well do you think you know the law? From time to time, we will post some tough little quizzes to see if you know the answer.

Hamilton was a pizza delivery driver.  One evening while working his shift, Hamilton traveled through an intersection while at that same moment, another car passed the red light and slammed into the side of Hamilton’s car causing severe injury to Hamilton’s head, neck and spinal cord. Hamilton has the following claims:

A. A workers’ compensation claim
B. A breach of contract claim
C. A possible personal injury claim
D. Both A and C

Bob found out that his girlfriend Nancy was dating another man, so he went into Nancy’s place of business and shot both Nancy and her co-worker Alice. Both women were injured, but neither died.

A. Nancy has a workers’ compensation claim
B. Alice has a workers’ compensation claim
C. Henry, a co-worker of Nancy who was also present when Nancy was shot has a workers’ compensation claim
D. Both B and C

Mark was an uninsured motorist when he was rear-ended by Steve, who had a policy limit of $300,000.00.

A. Mark can successfully seek compensation against Steve for pain and suffering
B. Steve can successfully sue Mark for being in Steve’s way
C. Alan, who was a passenger in Mark’s car has no case against Steve because Mark was uninsured
D. Mark can only seek damages for his property damage, and medical bills

Wright took a flying lesson from Wilber in a Cessna Skyhawk 162. The plane nosedived into the ground killing both parties. It was later discovered that the elevator broke off, which caused the plane crash.

A. Wright’s survivors can possibly successfully sue Wilber’s estate
B. Wilber’s survivors can possibly successfully sue Wright’s estate
C. Wilber and Wright can possibly succeed against the mechanic that serviced the plane
D. None of the above