Description
Question one (At least 3 Paragraph)
This is a group project and i am only rquired to submit my part of the project which is ONLY the" PROCEEDURE." in the case of Toxic Shock Disease Suit
P&G found negligent and offered a defective product when it sold Rely tampons.
QUESTION 2
THE CASE OF Audito v. City of Providence
Read and understand the case or question assigned. Show your Analysis and Reasoning and make it clear you understand the material. Be sure to incorporate the concepts of the chapter we are studying to show your reasoning. Dedicate at least one heading to each following outline topic:
Parties [Identify the plaintiff and the defendant]
Facts [Summarize only those facts critical to the outcome of the case]
Procedure [Who brought the appeal? What was the outcome in the lower court(s)?]Issue [Note the central question or questions on which the case turns]
Explain the applicable law(s). Use the textbook here. The law should come from the same chapter as the case. Be sure to use citations from the textbook including page numbers.
Holding [How did the court resolve the issue(s)? Who won?]
Reasoning [Explain the logic that supported the court's decision]
Do significant research outside of the book and demonstrate that you have in a very obvious way. This refers to research beyond the legal research. This involves something about the parties or other interesting related area. Show something you have discovered about the case, parties or other important element from your own research. Be sure this is obvious and adds value beyond the legal reasoning of the case.
Dedicate 1 heading to each of the case question(s) immediately following the case, if there are any. Be sure to restate and fully answer the questions.
Quality in terms of substance, form, grammar and context. Be entertaining! Use excellent visual material!
Wrap up with a Conclusion. This should summarize the key aspects of the decision and also your recommendations on the court's ruling.
Include citations and a reference page with your sources. Use APA style citations and references.
will furnish you with the applicable laws and pages and stuff shortly
Explanation & Answer
Attached.
OUTLINE
INTRODUCTION
BODY
CONCLUSION
REFERENCE
Running Head: LAW
ETHICS AND LAW
STUDENT NAME
COURSE TITLE
INSTRUCTOR
DATE
LAW
2
QUESTION 1
The process of the court ruling against the Procter & Gamble Company
In any lawsuit case, the plaintiff will always sue the case in opposition to the defendant
depending on the condition of the product or service provided by the authorized person.
Concerning the company which found negligent in toxic shock disease suit, the plaintiff is 18
years old, Denver University student, Deletha Dawn Lampshire who appealed to the Procter &
Gamble Company. Lampshire complained of becoming sick in May 1980 after being diagnosed
with a deadly shock disease just after she had used the Rely tampons sold by the Procter &
Gamble Company. She and her parents, therefore, sought for court justice in which they wanted
jury’s $25 million in punitive damages. The jury, on the other hand, never found that the Procter
& Gamble Company breached the warranty of the Rely tampons.
The Lampshire’s attorney, Jon Kidneigh’s primary concern was them winning the case so that
the company which is fond of practicing negligence concerning its defective product, the Rely
tampons would face serious jury’s damages as well as being restricted from the making any
appeal. Unfortunately, the Procter & Gamble’s attorney, Thomas Calder disputed the fact that the
company would call for the judgment made by the jury regarding their scenario. Therefore, they
would not allow any evidence against his clients which does not fully support their decision as
the defendants. However, the state centers that are in charge of syndrome management reported
an approximation of 1500 cases dealing with the bad shock condition together with the 84 death
cases as confirmed by Sherman Finesilver. On the contrast, the District Judge later pronounced
no jury’s punitive damages granted to Miss Lampshire which indicated that the defendant won
the case.
LAW
3
Following the judges’ ruling, the Lampshire’s attorney, Jon Kidneigh later surprised the floor by
revealing the Company’s argument based on the Lampshire’s earlier condition. The team
referred the victim’s condition as flu while it is the same court that accused the opponent when
Miss Lampshire became sadistically ill abruptly after taking the Rely tampons in May 1980.
However, Mr. Calder, the defendant’s attorney read the essay that the victim wrote six months
after she develops sickness in which she stated many of her accomplishments. This article posted
many questions including whether Lampshire was held back or frightened by the disease. It
hence acted as if the victim formed a controversy against the accused who for a long time has
failed to execute satisfactory clinical tests before marketing their product leading to clinical
issues. This has been indicated by the statistical data from the Federal Centers for Disease
Control. According to the Plaintiff, her need was to bring the Company t...
Review
Review
