{"product_id":"emanuel-law-outlines-for-torts-keyed-to-prosser-wade-schwartz-partlett-cardi-lahav-9781543807561","title":"Emanuel Law Outlines for Torts: Keyed to Prosser, Wade, Schwartz, Partlett, Cardi, Lahav","description":"\u003cp\u003e • Author(s): Steven L. Emanuel\u003cbr\u003e • Publisher: Aspen Publishing\u003cbr\u003e • Publisher Imprint: Aspen Publishing\u003cbr\u003e • BISAC: Torts\u003c\/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003c\/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eABOUT THE BOOK--TOOLS TO SUCCEED\u003c\/b\u003e\u003c\/p\u003e\u003cul\u003e\n\u003cli\u003e The \u003cb\u003e\u003ci\u003eCapsule Summary\u003c\/i\u003e\u003c\/b\u003e provides a quick reference summary of the key concepts covered in the full Outline. \u003c\/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003e The \u003cb\u003edetailed course Outline with black letter principles\u003c\/b\u003e supplements your casebook reading throughout the semester and gives structure to your own outline. \u003c\/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003e The \u003cb\u003e\u003ci\u003eQuiz Yourself\u003c\/i\u003e\u003c\/b\u003e feature includes a series of short-answer questions and sample answers to help you test your knowledge of the chapter's content. \u003c\/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003e\n\u003ci\u003e\u003cb\u003eExam Tips\u003c\/b\u003e\u003c\/i\u003e alert you to issues and commonly used fact patterns found on exams. \u003c\/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003e The \u003cb\u003e\u003ci\u003eCasebook Correlation Chart\u003c\/i\u003e\u003c\/b\u003e correlates each section in the Outline with the pages covering that topic in the major casebooks. \u003c\/li\u003e\n\u003c\/ul\u003e In this new edition of \u003ci\u003e\u003cb\u003eEmanuel(R)\u003c\/b\u003e\u003c\/i\u003e\u003ci\u003e\u003cb\u003e Law Outlines: Torts\u003c\/b\u003e\u003c\/i\u003e, professors and students will benefit from new and expanded coverage. Covers virtually all principal cases in Prosser, Wade \u0026amp; Schwartz's 15th Edition (2024), including over 20 cases that are new to the 15th Edition, such as: \u003cul\u003e\n\u003cli\u003e Burden of proof where Defendant's \u003cb\u003e\u003ci\u003esexual conduct\u003c\/i\u003e\u003c\/b\u003e is claimed to be \u003cb\u003e\u003ci\u003ebattery \u003c\/i\u003e\u003c\/b\u003eand Defendant raises the defense of \u003cb\u003e\u003ci\u003econsent\u003c\/i\u003e\u003c\/b\u003e. \u003ci\u003eRondini v. Bunn \u003c\/i\u003e(N.D. Ala 2020.) \u003c\/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003e Defendant's liability based on being a \u003cb\u003e\u003ci\u003e\"substantial factor\"\u003c\/i\u003e\u003c\/b\u003e in the harm suffered by Plaintiff, including the modern tendency to \u003cb\u003e\u003ci\u003ereject the substantial-factor standard\u003c\/i\u003e\u003c\/b\u003e. \u003ci\u003eDoull v. Foster \u003c\/i\u003e(Mass. 2021). \u003c\/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003e The \u003cb\u003e\u003ci\u003e\"value of a chance\"\u003c\/i\u003e\u003c\/b\u003e doctrine, used to make Defendant liable in \u003cb\u003e\u003ci\u003emedical-malpractice cases \u003c\/i\u003e\u003c\/b\u003ewhere Defendant's negligence deprived Plaintiff of a \u003cb\u003e\u003ci\u003eless-than-50% chance at a recovery\u003c\/i\u003e\u003c\/b\u003e. \u003ci\u003eSmith v. Providence Health \u0026amp; Services\u003c\/i\u003e (Ore. 2017). \u003c\/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003e The declining use of a \u003cb\u003e\u003ci\u003elater \"superseding cause\"\u003c\/i\u003e\u003c\/b\u003e as a reason to relieve Defendant of liability, where Plaintiff's injury would not have occurred but for the occurrence of that event. \u003ci\u003eBarry v. Quality Steel Prods.\u003c\/i\u003e (Conn. 2003). \u003c\/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003e Courts' disallowance of liability for \u003cb\u003e\u003ci\u003epure economic losses\u003c\/i\u003e\u003c\/b\u003e caused by Defendant in toxic-tort cases involving \u003ci\u003e\u003cb\u003epollution of land or water\u003c\/b\u003e\u003c\/i\u003e. \u003ci\u003eSouthern Cal. Gas Leak Cases\u003c\/i\u003e (Cal. 2019). \u003c\/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003e Government liability for \u003cb\u003e\u003ci\u003eministerial errors\u003c\/i\u003e\u003c\/b\u003e versus \u003cb\u003e\u003ci\u003esovereign immunity for discretionary decisions\u003c\/i\u003e\u003c\/b\u003e. \u003ci\u003eLorman v. City of Rutland\u003c\/i\u003e (Vt. 2018). \u003c\/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003e Failure-to-warn liability where Defendant is the maker of a \u003cb\u003e\u003ci\u003ebrand-name pharmaceutical\u003c\/i\u003e\u003c\/b\u003e, but Plaintiff was injured by \u003cb\u003e\u003ci\u003efaulty labeling of the generic version \u003c\/i\u003e\u003c\/b\u003eof the same drug made by someone other than Defendant. \u003ci\u003eT.H. v. Novartis Pharma.\u003c\/i\u003e (Cal. 2017). \u003c\/li\u003e\n\u003c\/ul\u003e","brand":"Atlantic Books","offers":[{"title":"Paperback","offer_id":46438400491671,"sku":"9781543807561","price":8306.0,"currency_code":"INR","in_stock":true}],"thumbnail_url":"\/\/cdn.shopify.com\/s\/files\/1\/0666\/3471\/1191\/files\/9781543807561.webp?v=1769107362","url":"https:\/\/atlanticbooks.com\/products\/emanuel-law-outlines-for-torts-keyed-to-prosser-wade-schwartz-partlett-cardi-lahav-9781543807561","provider":"Atlantic Books","version":"1.0","type":"link"}