Legal Writing

3.1
I A.

1.N/A

2. Under pain and suffering, P may recover not only for physical pain but for fright, nervousness, grief, anxiety, worry, mortification, shock, humiliation, indignity, embarrassment, apprehension, terror or ordeal.

3. When are due to the impact of a bodily injury upon or in aggravation of preexisting neurotic or psychic weakness. (No Recovery for “imaginary pain” that isconsciously fabricated).

B. None

IIA.
20 ALR5th 1

IIB.

1. Expert testimony is not needed because the victim suffered injuries resulting in hearing difficulties that were known to be permanent.

2. Evidence showing that the injury continued to affect the injured party until the time of trial. The nature or persistence of the injury or its effects may be shown by evidenceindicating limitations on the injured party’s ability to work, sleep, perform simple task, or engage in a wise variety of recreational activities. May include lay testimony indicating continuing physical effects of the initial injury, such as a loss of strength or weight, limited range of motion, or difficulty in walking or running. Prof of continuing medical treatment including treatment in home or theneed for special devices such as a “built –up” show, or a brace, may also provide the jury with a basis for inferring permanency or future pain and suffering. Proof of muscle spams or a loss of hand strength demonstrated by a “grip test”, may provide further evidence to support recovery based on permanent injury or future pain and suffering. Family members and friends may provide valuabletestimony to corroborate claims that inured parties suffered continual aches and pains, or where no longer able to work or engage in other activities.

IIC. 17
IID. Yes, Section 4 To establish permanent injury

III.
A. I would start with Legal Encyclopedias because they give you a general idea of the state law. They are helpful in obtaining general background information.

B. I would use A.L.R.because they have variety of jurisdictions to provide an overview of the law. A.L.R. focus on narrower legal questions from multiple jurisdictions.

C. (b)

3.2

IA
1. Negligence section 1163

2. “The thing or transaction speaks for itself” or “the thing or instrumentality speaks for itself”.

3. States v. Lourdes Hosp., 100 N.Y.2d 208, 762 N.Y.S.2d 1, 792 N.E.2d 151 (2008).

4.“That the thing or instrumentality which caused the injury complained of was under the control or management of the defendant, and that the occurrence resulting in the injury was such as in the ordinary course of things would not happen if those who had its control or management used proper care”.

B.

1. Medical malpractice: res ipsa loquitur in negligent anesthesia cases

2. Randy R.Koenders, J.D.

3. Voss v. Bridwell (1961) 188 Kan 643, 464 P2d 955 and Pederson v. Dumouchel (1967) 72 Wash 2d 73, 431 P2d 973, 31 ALR3d 1100

C.

1. Res Ipsa Loquitur in action against hospital for injury to patient

2.a — Failure to remove a foreign object after surgery
— Injuries to unaffected areas during surgery
— Injuries sustained by the patient in areas remote from the field ofoperation or surgery
— Injuries within the field of surgery;
— Burns due to overexposure to x-ray or heat treatments

2.b Such as the limitation that the doctrine does not apply unless the matter is plainly within the common knowledge of laypersons.

IIA
1. Res Ipsa Loquitur and Expert Opinion Evidence in Medical Malpractice Cases: Strange Bedfellows.

2. “1) Injuries from accidentsinvolving falling flour barrels and the like are almost always attributable to the negligence of the person exercising control over the barrels, injuries in cases of alleged medical malpractice may result from a variety of causal agents other than the negligence of the defendant, such as the onset of disease or a preexisting medical condition. 2) Many of the procedures called into question in...