Buffalo Creek Disaster: Case Study

The Plaintiffs, Garetsons, own a well in Haskell County, which they use for irrigation pursuant to a vested water right. The Defendant, American Warrior Inc. (AWI), owns two nearby wells with junior water appropriation rights. Garetsons sued AWI requesting an injunction to prevent AWI from pumping groundwater. The District Court found that AWI’s wells were causing significant impairment and drawdown of the Garetsons’ water rights. As a result, tThe District Court granted an

The Plaintiff is claiming $35 million from the State of NSW, which is purported to be vicariously liable for the Land and Environment Court and Pain J [1]. This claim includes nullifying Pain J’s judgment [14], and it is accompanied by Motions to uphold Lloyd J’s dismissal and refund the Plaintiff’s filing fees [2].

However, the dams were of faulty construction. Dam number one which caused the flooding was constructed of coarse mining refuse that Pittston had dumped into the Middle Fork of Buffalo Creek starting in 1968. This dam failed first on the heels of heavy rains. The water from Dam number three then took out dams number two and then number one. Dam number three had simply

Gerald M. Stern’s novel, The Buffalo Creek Disaster, helps students better understand the civil procedure process by describing the process through an actual case Stern himself litigated. The case began in 1972 after a dam collapsed in Buffalo Creek, West Virginia, killing 125 people and destroying many homes. Other than property damage and loss of loved ones, those who survived suffered what Stern referred to as psychic impairment, or mental suffering. Stern’s lawsuit involved 625 plaintiffs suing the Pittston Coal Group, or the stockholder of the Buffalo Mining Company, for compensatory and punitive damages. Stern had to choose a court and a judge, decide how much relief the plaintiffs were seeking, depose witnesses, and work with the defendant’s counsel

The customers, Charles Ellison and Susan Bresler represented by the Atlanta law firm Strickland Brockington & Lewis sued the Natural Gas Company “under a private right of action in the Gas Act.” The plaintiffs sought to recoup their overpayments charged through the defendant’s violations of the Natural Gas Competition and Deregulation Act (Natural Gas Act). The defendant asked the court to dismiss the case due to the plaintiff’s failure to establish a reasonable claim on which repayment should be given. A trial court granted a motion to dismiss the case, but an

shall be liable to the party injured in an action at law, Suit in equity, or other proper

Facts: To resolve a conflict that arose from a computer system installation, Plaintiff Cunard (P) sought to sue Defendant Abney, dba Coopers (D). P filed relying on the court’s diversity jurisdiction. P was a British corporation. D, in response, challenged on jurisdictional grounds because, as it alleged, the partners to D were alien and the D corporation was alien with respect to the court altogether. Thereby, D made a motion to dismiss.

Through the litigation and more specifically the discovery process, Pittston became answerable to the people of the town. Depositions of key Pittston personnel revealed that Pittston knew that it was exposing the people to significant risk of the flood. With the revelation of this information, Pittston faced true exposure to punitive damages and, consequently, power shifted to the townspeople. Thereafter, Pittston settled the claims and finally compensated the victims for their loss. Beyond that, the settlement served as a check on Pittston, deterring it from constructing another faulty dam. The threat of this type of litigation forces large corporations like Pittston to rethink business decisions that could possibly place the public in harm’s

The plaintiff (David Smith) can win the lawsuit against the defendant, Martin Motors Inc. This paper will go over different issues and factors that can be used to determine why the David Smith will be successful in the lawsuit against Martin Motors Inc.

4. If Dan's claims Pat was comparatively negligent, and the jurisdiction maintains a rule of pure comparative fault, which of the following statements is accurate?

The main issue in this case occurs when CenCo Inc. refuses to pay Eric. Eric was hired to design a webpage for the company for $400 and he also trouble-shooted the operating systems of CenCo Inc. for an additional $400. CenCo Inc. promised to pay Eric until he performed the work but when he did, CenCo Inc. refused to do so. Eric decided to file a suit against them but since the contract was made orally, CenCo does not want to respond.

This paper will discuss the legal issues in Case Example D. In the case of Daniel Boone versus Zoom Car Company, the legal issue involves Daniel Boone suing Zoom Car Company for medical costs he endured from a severe beating when using a defective product that the company provided. The defendant, Zoom Car Company, is an automobile manufacturing company that offers its customers a number of extra features, including a compass that is installed on the cars dashboard. The compass is manufactured by Corrigan Rulers, Compasses and Slide Rules, Inc.

What is at stake in this litigation for the parties in the case and more broadly? (500)

Ragnarr, must prove to the court that due to the states negligent actions he will consequently experience economic loss. Causation refers to whether the defendants conduct (or omission), in this case The State Of Victoria, caused the resulting harm or damage. The common law of negligence obliges instigation of causation for the purposefulness of attaching legal accountability. Another element that must be proven is that it is applicable for the scope of the negligent persons liability to extend to the harm so caused (scope of liability ). As it is a case of negligence the onus of proving, on the balance of probabilities, is weighed upon our client, the plaintiff Mr. Ragnarr. Even if the ‘but for’ test is applied to the current situation in the case, the outcome would be that the loss suffered by the plaintiff would have only occurred if the defendant acted negligently, which they did, and therefore if they hadn’t have acted in that way, then our client would not have been publicly humiliated by the State Of Victoria as a result. The court must deliberate whether it is suitable to extend the scope of the defendant negligence to the harm caused to the plaintiff and our client, Mr. Ragnarr. The harm that occurred, or similar harm, must have been foreseeable in order for it to reach within the scope of liability upon the

     The legal system is an essential element in the successful operation of this country. It is a system that is utilized every day, by every type of person, from the average blue-collar worker to the average Wall Street broker. There is a multitude of ways that the legal system is put to use. One such way is the class action lawsuit. A Civil Action, by Jonathan Harr, uses the account of a single case, Anne Anderson, et al., v. W.R. Grace & Co., et al, to illustrate the power and importance of class action lawsuits in the civil justice system.