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

Jan 16th, 2016
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) panamagirl
School: Duke University

Studypool has helped 1,244,100 students

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

Type your question here (or upload an image)

1820 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