Business law discussion

Description

Answer the question in five paragraphs, this is for a business law class. I request if I can please get the first 2 paragraphs by Wednesday night. Intentional Torts – Corporations  COLLAPSE As a matter of public policy, damages available for intentional torts tend to be broader and more generous than for negligent torts. In order to preserve individual rights and safety and overall social welfare, society generally wishes to deter its members from intentionally attacking each other.  For example, in the United States, it is easier to get punitive damages if one can prove that the tort was intentional.  However, it is harder to prove intentional torts because as with many felony crimes, one must prove subjective elements involving the content of the defendant’s mind, and defendants do not always express their harmful intent aloud or in writing.   How to tell the difference?   The key difference between intentional torts and negligent torts is that the plaintiff must prove the additional element that the defendant acted with the specific intent to perform (i.e. acted with a mental state of intentionally performing) the act that was the proximate cause of the plaintiff’s injuries. Last week we discussed the Deepwater Horizon (BP) oil spill.  Find articles online about courts requiring BP to indemnify halliburton for gulf oil spill, and discuss how fraud (an intentional tort) may cost one of the companys billions of dollars.  Can you find other examples of corporate intentional torts? In researching examples of corporate intentional torts I came across this Atlanta case involving the use of a GPS. Mostly every person who has a smart technology device has relied on the GPS application or the actual GPS itself to get to an unknown destination. You tell the GPS where you want to go so you rely on the information given back and follow those directions. But, how many times have you experienced the GPS has given you wrong information? This case in Atlanta is a good example of when you should not depend entirely on these devices and use common sense especially when operating a vehicle. King Fareed from North Carolina got lost near the Atlanta airport. Relying on the directions given by his phone’s GPS to make a U-turn, King did not realize that a motorcyclist was coming from the opposite direction and struck him causing his death. King was charged with “involuntary manslaughter, improper U-turn and failure to use due care in use of an electronic device.” Can you blame the GPS manufacturers for this tragic accident too? Should King have used common sense and not been driving while using his smart phone and blindly made the U-turn where it is prohibited?