Professor Steenson, Torts, Spring 1983

Part I.

A.

(30% - 55 minutes)

The Northern County Power Company entered into a contract with Tower, Inc., pursuant to which Tower was to provide Northern with properly constructed towers to be used as supports for a new main power line that Northern wanted to run from its power plant to its feeder lines. The contract called for the construction of six towers which were to be used as supports for the 20,000 volt main power line. The towers were constructed by Tower. The towers were anchored to the ground by cables attached to anchors set into the ground. The anchors were installed by Weld, Inc., a company hired by Northern to install the anchors.

Two weeks after the towers were installed, and service was commenced using the new main power line, one of the towers collapsed. Investigation revealed that the collapse was due to a defective weld on one of the anchors. The welding was done by Weld, Inc. employees. Had the anchors been inspected the defect would have been revealed, but neither Northern nor Tower inspected Weld's work. The tower collapse resulted in a discontinuation of service by Northern, resulting in lost profits.

When the tower collapsed one of the power lines came into contact with a barbed wire fence located some distance from the power lines. The barbed wire fence was electrified. A short time after the collapse of the tower, Mr. Farmer, who owned a farm located one-half mile from the tower, came into contact with the fence, which ran"along his property. He sustained a severe electrical shock.

In its contract with Northern, Tower, Inc. provided that Northern would be responsible for any property damage, economic loss, or personal injury resulting from any defects in material or workmanship in the work it did or contracted to have done for Northern. Northern agreed to the contract terms.

After the accident Northern asked Tower to reimburse it for the repair or replacement costs of the tower and for the economic loss it sustained because of the interruption of service. Tower refused, citing the contract provision imposing full responsibility for those losses on Northern.

Based upon the above facts, answer the following questions:

1. Can Northern recover from Tower under a strict liability theory for the damage to the towers and for the repair or replacement costs incurred in repairing or replacing the towers or for the economic loss it sustained because of the interruption of its service?

2. Can Mr. Farmer recover from either Northern or Tower under a strict liability theory?

3. If Northern recovers from Tower, can Tower obtain indemnity from Weld, Inc.?

B.

(20% - 35 minutes)

Professor Cut, a law professor, received a phone call one day from Ms. Baker, the lead partner in a large metropolitan law firm. Ms. Baker's firm was interviewing law students from Professor Cut's law school. Ms. Baker had interviewed a student from that school, Bill Ex. Ms. Baker was very impressed with Bill in the interview, but she wanted additional information about him before making any final determination about hiring him. Rather than calling any of Bill's listed references, Ms. Baker decided to call Professor Cut, because she had great respect for his judgment.

In response to Ms. Baker's questions about Bill, Professor Cut replied that he had not had Bill in any classes, but that he would see what he could find out about him. The same day, over lunch in the faculty lounge, Professor Cut asked several other professors if they knew anything about Bill. Professor Charity disclosed to Professor Cut that Bill had received a grade of "C" in her antitrust course the previous semester. Professor Dregs also reported that Mr. Ex had done quite poorly in his drainage law course. He thought that he had given Bill a "D" in that course. However, Professor Dregs was mistaken when he disclosed that information. Bill had in fact received an "A" in that course. Professor Dregs got Mr. Ex confused with another student when he gave the grade information to Professor Cut.

Armed with this information, Professor Cut called Ms. Baker and told her that in his opinion Bill would not be a good candidate for her firm. He stated that Bill had received only a grade of"C" in one course, and close to a failing grade in another course. In framing his opinion Professor Cut relied on erroneous information communicated to him by Professor Dregs. Also, in stating that Bill had received a "C" in one course, he did not disclose that the grade had been received from Professor Charity, that Professor Charity rarely gave a grade above "C", and that Bill's grade was in fact one of the top grades in Professor Charity's class. Professor Cut knew that Professor Charity was a notoriously hard grader and that a grade of "C" would in fact be a very good grade from her perspective.

Relying on Professor Cut's information, Ms. Baker decided not to hire Bill. Had Bill been hired he would have received a starting salary of $25,000 per year. Bill did in fact obtain employment, but at a salary of $15,000 per year. Based upon the above facts would Bill Ex be entitled to recover from Professor Cut? In your answer evaluate both the theories of recovery and any potential defenses that might be asserted by Professor Cut.

Part II.

(50% - 90 minutes)

1. A was injured when he slipped and fell on a banana peel in B's grocery store. As a result of the injuries he sustained, A incurred medical expenses of $1,000. All expenses were covered by A=s private health insurance policy., In a lawsuit against B for negligence, A proved damages of $2,000, consisting of $1,000 in medical expenses (the same expenses that were covered by A's health insurance) and $1,000 in pain and suffering. Is B entitled to have A's tort recovery reduced by the $1,000 A received from his insurance recovery?

2. A was killed as the result of an accident caused by B's negligent operation of a crane. A lived for one week after the accident. During that time he suffered substantial pain. In a wrongful death action against B will the personal representative of A be entitled to recover for either A's pain and suffering or the emotional distress suffered by A's surviving beneficiaries because of A's death?

3. A was injured in a hunting accident when two hunters, B and C, acting independently, fired at A. Both hunters hit him. A and B executed a Pierringer release, pursuant to which B paid the plaintiff $20,000. At trial, against C, A proved that his total damages were $60,000. The jury determined that B and C were each 50 percent at fault. Based upon these facts, what is C's liability to A? What would C's liability be if the jury found that C was 100 percent at fault in causing A's injuries? In answering you should assume that the suit is brought in a jurisdiction that recognizes Pierringer releases and that the jurisdiction has a modified comparative fault statute.

4. A, an employee of the B Corporation, was injured while using a punch press manufactured by the C Company. Because the punch press was not equipped with proper safety devices, A brought suit against C Company. C Company then impleaded B Corporation, seeking contribution. The jury found A to be 20 percent at fault, C Company 50 percent at fault, and B Corporation 30 percent at fault. A's damages were $100,000. Prior to commencing suit, A had received $40,000 in workers' compensation benefits from B Corporation. Based upon these facts, what is B Corporation's liability to C Company on the contribution claim? What would the result be if A were found to be 30 percent at fault, B Corporation 20 percent at fault, and C Company 50 percent at fault? Assume that suit is brought in Minnesota.

5. A was injured by the independent, negligent actions of B and C, who were driving motorcycles. In a lawsuit by A against B and C, the jury assigned 40 percent of the fault to A, 40 percent to B, and 20 percent to C. A's damages were fixed at $10,000. Based upon these facts, is either of the defendants liable and if so, in what amount? Assume that the Minnesota Comparative Fault Act applies. Ignore the No-Fault Act.

6. A was crossing an intersection against a "Don't Walk" sign, completely absorbed in the study of her contracts casebook, B was driving his car down the street. He noticed A, but did not slow down, assuming that A would look up and move out of the way before he reached the intersection. A did not look and B did not slow down. He hit A, injuring her. A brought suit against B. The jury found that A was 60 percent at fault and that B was 40 percent at fault. Can A avoid the impact of the Comparative Fault Act by raising the doctrine of "last clear chance"?

7. Paul leased an apartment from Multi-Dwell. Multi-Dwell was in the business of leasing apartments. Paul lived in a recently built apartment complex that had been purchased by Multi-Dwell. He had lived in the apartment building for one month when a light fixture fell from the ceiling, cutting his head. The fixture was not properly secured to the ceiling. However, a reasonable inspection would not have revealed the latent defect in the fixture. Assuming that Paul cannot establish negligence in an action against Multi-Dwell, will he nonetheless be entitled to recover from Multi-Dwell? Under what theory or theories?

8. A and B agreed to go deer hunting one weekend. They took A's car, but B shared in the gasoline costs. A and B also shared expenses for food and shelter. A and B were hunting from the same deer stand, waiting for deer. They saw a movement and, thinking it was a deer, fired simultaneously, wounding C. C was wearing a brown jacket and pants at the time, and was not wearing properly colored clothing for deer hunting season. The jury found that C was 50 percent at fault and that A and B were each 25 percent at fault. Is C entitled to recover his damages from A and B? Assume that the Minnesota Comparative Fault Act applies.

9. A, out on the town one evening, parked his car in a downtown St. Paul parking ramp. When he was ready to go home he went to the ramp to retrieve his car. He got into the car, started the engine, put the car in gear, and started to move forward when he was accosted by an unknown assailant who demanded at gunpoint that A give him a ride. A refused and was shot. Assuming that A's car is insured as required by the Minnesota No-Fault Automobile Insurance Act, is A entitled to recover basic economic loss benefits to cover the medical expenses he incurred as a result of the shooting?

10. A was riding his motorcycle down Summit Avenue in St. Paul, when he was sideswiped by a car driven by B. A's motorcycle was pushed up and over the curb. The motorcycle struck C, who was walking down Summit Avenue. Both A and C were injured. A carried only liability insurance on his motorcycle. B's car was insured as required by the No-Fault Act. C did not own a motor vehicle and was not an insured under any one else's insurance policy. Is C entitled to recover basic economic loss benefits for the medical expenses he incurred as a result of his injuries and if so, from what source? Is A entitled to recover basic economic loss benefits and if so, from what source?

11. A was severely injured when his car was hit by a car owned and driven by B. Both cars were insured as required by the No-Fault Act. As a result of the accident A was out of work for twelve weeks. A's gross wage at the time of his injury was $600 per week. A also owned another motor vehicle, also insured as required by the No-Fault Act. Although A was unable to work at this regular job, he did obtain part-time employment for which he was paid $100 per week. A lived alone. Although he was able to work on a part-time basis, he was unable to take care of his house. Because A was unable to do the regular household work, he asked his brother if he would help out. His brother spent approximately five hours per week performing the necessary work, over the twelve week period. What basic economic loss benefits, if any, is A entitled to recover?

12. A owned three motor vehicles. All were insured as required by the No-Fault Act. A's minor daughter, B, was severely injured when she was hit by a Metropolitan Transit Commission bus while she was walking to school one morning. The medical expenses that will be incurred because of B's injuries will far exceed $40,000. What source or sources of basic economic loss benefits coverage will be available to cover B's medical expenses?

13. A was injured when his car was hit by a car owned and driven by B. Both cars were insured as required by the No-Fault Act. As a result of the accident A incurred medical expenses of $500 for emergency-room treatment following the accident. As a result of the accident A was cut under his right arm. It took three stitches to close the cut, leaving a jagged scar one-inch long. A also missed one week of work because of his injuries. His gross wage was $500 per week. His insurance company paid him $500 per week for the medical expenses he incurred and $200 for the wage loss he incurred. In a negligence action against B, what damages would A be entitled to recover? How would your answer differ if B were uninsured?

14. A owned a motor vehicle that should have been insured as required by the No-Fault Act. He failed to obtain the required insurance, however. A was injured in an automobile accident while riding in a motor vehicle owned and driven by his neighbor, B. B's car was insured as required by the No-Fault Act. However, B's insurance policy contained an exclusionary clause stating that coverage would not be provided to any occupant of B's insured vehicle, it the occupant owned his own motor vehicle. Will A nonetheless be entitled to recover basic economic loss benefits under B's policy? If B's car were uninsured, would A be entitled to recover basic economic loss benefits? If so, from what source?