Abstracts - faqs.org

Abstracts

Law

Search abstracts:
Abstracts » Law

Signals are mixed on employer liability for injuries caused by drunk workers

Article Abstract:

Courts have applied varying interpretations to laws on whether employers are liable for the actions of employees intoxicated at a company gathering or event. The logic followed in a recent Florida case, Carroll Air Systems v Greenbaum, suggests that employer liability furthers social interests in best allocating the economic costs of injuries. Other theories of employer responsibility include the doctrine of respondeat superior and the theory of negligent breach of duty for failing to control the employee's behavior.

Author: Segal, Martin E.
Publisher: American Bar Association
Publication Name: ABA Journal
Subject: Law
ISSN: 0747-0088
Year: 1995
Cases, Employer liability, Florida, Drinking of alcoholic beverages, Drinking (Alcoholic beverages), Business entertaining, Dram shop acts, states

User Contributions:

Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:

CAPTCHA


Foreseeability in a fog: uncertainty over pre-existing duties can undermine contracts

Article Abstract:

Contract law includes the doctrine of unforeseen difficulties which entails the determination of whether an event was foreseeable at the time the parties made the contract. The test is whether a reasonable man would have foreseen that event or a similar one. The courts have not achieved uniformity in unforeseen difficulties cases, and differing results can even exist in the same jurisdiction. Suggestions for applying the doctrine consistently are given.

Author: Segal, Martin E.
Publisher: American Bar Association
Publication Name: ABA Journal
Subject: Law
ISSN: 0747-0088
Year: 1996
Analysis, Interpretation and construction, Contracts, Foreseeability (Law), Performance (Law)

User Contributions:

Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:

CAPTCHA


Unloading debts; reduced-amount payments can leave creditors high and dry

Article Abstract:

Debt settlement cases pose a danger for providers of goods and services if the vendor-creditor, or seller of the product or service, receives and cashes a check from the vendee-debtor, or buyer, for less than the billed amount but with a "paid in full" notation . The common-law rules widely followed are summarized, based on whether debts are liquidated or unliquidated. Relevant Uniform Commercial Code sections are also summarized.

Author: Segal, Martin E.
Publisher: American Bar Association
Publication Name: ABA Journal
Subject: Law
ISSN: 0747-0088
Year: 1999
United States, Laws, regulations and rules, Debtor and creditor

User Contributions:

Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:

CAPTCHA


Subjects list: United States
Similar abstracts:
  • Abstracts: IRS issues major secular trust rulings on employer grantor trust arrangements. IRS issues more secular trust rulings
  • Abstracts: Voluntary-aided school is not a state employer. Dismissal for pregnancy-related illness not discriminatory. Applying the Burchell guidelines
  • Abstracts: HMO legislation is aimed at protecting patients; consumers and providers call for regulation; the managed care industry would disagree
  • Abstracts: PBGC proposes regulations implementing RPA participant notice requirements for underfunded plans. PBGC issues final rule on 1997 maximum guaranteeable benefit; proposes rule change on disclosure of premium-related information
  • Abstracts: Suits increasing for failure to spot cancer. Law firms take document blooper battles to court
This website is not affiliated with document authors or copyright owners. This page is provided for informational purposes only. Unintentional errors are possible.
Some parts © 2025 Advameg, Inc.