Negligence And Tort Claims

Summary

In a pure comparative negligence jurisdiction, Marias recovery is reduced by her fault percentage, allowing her to recover $65,000 from $100,000 in damages. Michelle can pursue an assault claim against Maybelle for threatening harm. Sam may be liable for battery and negligence for injuring Linus with a beer bottle. George may not have a viable assault claim, but Linus has a valid battery claim.

Full Conversation

On Monday, Maybelle sees Michelle in the hall between classes and tells Michelle, “I am going to beat you up this weekend.” For which tort claim is Michelle likely to prevail against Maybelle?
Michelle is likely to prevail against Maybelle for the tort claim of assault.
- Assault: The threat of imminent harm or offensive contact that causes reasonable apprehension in the victim.
Sam and George are roommates. They are in an argument on the balcony of their apartment. Sam picks up a beer bottle to throw at George and takes aim. George puts his hands up to protect his face. Sam trips and the beer bottle flies over the balcony and hits Linus (who happens to be walking on the street below) instead. Linus never saw the bottle but it knocked him out cold. For which tort claims will Sam likely be liable?
Case Rating: *
Sam will likely be liable for:
- Battery: Harmful or offensive contact to another person (Linus) caused by Sam's intentional act.
- Negligence: Failing to act with reasonable care, leading to Linus's injury.
Any further details about Linus's injuries or other pertinent information to assess the situation better?
would it be assault for george, and battery for linus?
Case Rating: *
Based on the scenario, George may not have a viable assault claim because he was not actually hit by the beer bottle; however, he did experience apprehension of an imminent harmful contact which is the essence of assault. On the other hand, Linus has a viable battery claim because he was struck by the beer bottle.
Is there any other detail you would like to know?