The proven Glannon Guide is a user-friendly study aid to use throughout the semester as a great supplement to (or substitute for) classroom lecture. Topics are broken down into manageable pieces and are explained in a conversational tone. Chapters are interspersed with hypotheticals like those posed in the classroom that include analysis of answers to ensure thorough understanding. Additionally, The Closer questions pose sophisticated hypotheticals at the end of each chapter to present cumulative review of earlier topics. More like classroom experiences, the Glannon Guide provides you with straightforward explanations of complex legal concepts, often in a humorous style that makes the material stick. The user-friendly Glannon Guide is your proven partner throughout the semester when you need a supplement to (or substitute for) classroom lecture. The material is broken into small, manageable pieces to help you master concepts.Multiple-choice questions are interspersed throughout each chapter (not lumped at the end) to mirror the flow of a classroom lecture. Correct and incorrect answers are carefully explained; you learn "why" they do or do not work. You can rely on authority; the series was created by Joseph W. Glannon Harvard-educated, best-selling author of, among other legal texts, Examples & Explanations; Civil Procedure, now in its sixth edition. The Closer poses a sophisticated problem question at the end of each chapter to test your comprehension. A final Closing Closer provides you practice opportunity as well as a cumulative review of all the concepts from earlier chapters. You can check your understanding each step of the way. More like classroom experiences, these Guides provide straightforward explanations of complex legal concepts, often in a humorous style that makes the material stick.
... Liu Chong Hing Bank Ltd [1986] AC80 at 193) doubted that 'there was anything to the advantage of the law's development in searching for a liability in tort where the parties are in a contractual relationship'.
This was established in Malone v Laskey (1907) and confirmed by the House of Lords in Hunter v Canary Wharf. Hunter v Canary Wharf [1996] 1 All ER 482 FACTS: A private nuisance action was brought against the developers of the Canary ...
Lord Pearson , Baker v Willoughby , at 496 I think a solution of the theoretical problem can be found in cases such as this by taking a comprehensive and unitary view of the damage caused by the original accident .
Rosenberg, 90 Md. App. 158, 600 A.2d 882 (1990), rev'd, 328 Md. 664, 616 A.2d 866 (1992) (see note 48, infra). See also Peroutka v. ... Sears, 163 Md. App. 220, 878 A.2d 628 (2005). 40 Compare former Md. Rule 342c 2(h) with Md. Rule ...
The book also incorporates comment on the implications of the Human Rights Act 1998 for the law of torts.
(Per Lord Upjohn in London Passenger Transport Board v Upson [1949] AC 155, 168.) Discuss the approach taken by the courts to determine when a tortious remedy will be permitted to redress a breach of a statutory duty when the statute ...
The authors designed this book on current education research.
Confirmed in Garner v Salford County Council [2013] where the claim failed for lack of evidence that the defendant's negligence exposed the claimant to more than minimal levels of asbestos. The opposite conclusion was reached, ...
Hardbound - New, hardbound print book.
Tort Law and Alternatives: Cases and Materials