Howard v. Wilson trial (p. 186), legal homework

Jan 16th, 2016
Anonymous
Category:
History
Price: $5 USD

Question description

Howard v. Wilson (p. 186): The Mississippi Supreme Court holds that even though the plaintiff's complaint sought to characterize the defendant's 'violent attack" as an instance of negligence, the complaint really alleged a claim of battery that was time-barred because of the operation of the applicable statute of limitations on intentional tort claims.

Point for Discussion: Why did the plaintiff, Wilson, was so desperate to have the court buy the argument that her claim was a negligence claim rather than a battery claim?  Explain the case and elements needed to be met for the claims.

100 word thanks


Tutor Answer

(Top Tutor) Studypool Tutor
School: Duke University

Studypool has helped 1,244,100 students

Review from student
Studypool Student
" Thanks, good work "
Ask your homework questions. Receive quality answers!

Type your question here (or upload an image)

1831 tutors are online

Brown University





1271 Tutors

California Institute of Technology




2131 Tutors

Carnegie Mellon University




982 Tutors

Columbia University





1256 Tutors

Dartmouth University





2113 Tutors

Emory University





2279 Tutors

Harvard University





599 Tutors

Massachusetts Institute of Technology



2319 Tutors

New York University





1645 Tutors

Notre Dam University





1911 Tutors

Oklahoma University





2122 Tutors

Pennsylvania State University





932 Tutors

Princeton University





1211 Tutors

Stanford University





983 Tutors

University of California





1282 Tutors

Oxford University





123 Tutors

Yale University





2325 Tutors