Загрузка страницы

What’s Inside The Box? (The Case Of)

When are you responsible for what’s in the box?
Get CuriosityStream AND Nebula for 30 days free https://curiositystream.com/legaleagle Special EXTENDED version only on Nebula!

Palsgraf v. Long Island Railroad Co., 248 N.Y. 339, 162 N.E. 99 (1928). #TrueCrime #LegalEagle

Written by Devin Stone, Ilyse Fishman, & Tricia Aurand
Illustrations by Nik Gothic and Alex Duran
Edited by Amy McClung
Voices by Alexander Masters, Jamie Werner, and Kevin O’Connell

Summary from Wikipedia:
Palsgraf v. Long Island Railroad Co., 248 N.Y. 339, 162 N.E. 99 (1928), is a leading case in American tort law on the question of liability to an unforeseeable plaintiff. The case was heard by the New York Court of Appeals, the highest state court in New York; its opinion was written by Chief Judge Benjamin Cardozo, a leading figure in the development of American common law and later a United States Supreme Court justice.

The plaintiff, Helen Palsgraf, was waiting at a Long Island Rail Road station in August 1924 while taking her daughters to the beach. Two men attempted to board the train before hers; one (aided by railroad employees) dropped a package that exploded, causing a large coin-operated scale on the platform to hit her. After the incident, she began to stammer, and subsequently sued the railroad, arguing that its employees had been negligent while assisting the man, and that she had been harmed by the neglect. In May 1927 she obtained a jury verdict of $6,000, which the railroad appealed. Palsgraf gained a 3–2 decision in the Appellate Division, and the railroad appealed again. Cardozo wrote for a 4–3 majority of the Court of Appeals, ruling that there was no negligence because the employees, in helping the man board, did not have a duty of care to Palsgraf as injury to her was not a foreseeable harm from aiding a man with a package. The original jury verdict was overturned, and the railroad won the case.

A number of factors, including the bizarre facts and Cardozo's outstanding reputation, made the case prominent in the legal profession, and it remains so, taught to most if not all American law students in torts class. Cardozo's conception, that tort liability can only occur when a defendant breaches a duty of care the defendant owes to a plaintiff, causing the injury sued for, has been widely accepted in American law. In dealing with proximate cause, many states have taken the approach championed by the Court of Appeals' dissenter in Palsgraf, Judge William S. Andrews.

(Thanks to CuriosityStream for sponsoring this video and helping to make this channel possible)

New episodes weekly! Subscribe here:
https://www.youtube.com/legaleagle?sub_confirmation=1

★More series on LegalEagle★
Real Lawyer Reacts: https://goo.gl/hw9vcE
Laws Broken: https://goo.gl/PJw3vK
Law 101: https://goo.gl/rrzFw3
Real Law Review: https://goo.gl/NHUoqc

I get asked a lot about whether being a practicing attorney is like being a lawyer on TV. I love watching legal movies and courtroom dramas. It's one of the reasons I decided to become a lawyer. But sometimes they make me want to pull my hair out because they are ridiculous. So I decided to make my own series exploring real cases and true crime. I believe that if you give people the relevant information they can make informed decisions about our world. The “law” is not necessarily the statutes that are passed by congress but are the rules that everyone agrees to live by. This series explores the cases and stories that shaped our law.

All clips used for fair use commentary, criticism, and educational purposes. See Hosseinzadeh v. Klein, 276 F.Supp.3d 34 (S.D.N.Y. 2017); Equals Three, LLC v. Jukin Media, Inc., 139 F. Supp. 3d 1094 (C.D. Cal. 2015).

Music by Epidemic Sound: http://epidemicsound.com/creator

Typical legal disclaimer from a lawyer (occupational hazard): This is not legal advice, nor can I give you legal advice. Sorry! Everything here is for informational purposes only and not for the purpose of providing legal advice. You should contact your attorney to obtain advice with respect to any particular issue or problem. Nothing here should be construed to form an attorney-client relationship. Also, some of the links in this post may be affiliate links, meaning, at no cost to you, I will earn a small commission if you click through and make a purchase. But if you click, it really helps me make more of these videos!

========================================================

★ Tweet me @legaleagleDJ ➜ https://twitter.com/LegalEagleDJ
★ More vids on Facebook: ➜ https://www.facebook.com/legaleaglereacts
★ Stella’s Insta ➜ https://www.instagram.com/stellathelegalbeagle

For promotional inquiries please reach out here: legaleagle@standard.tv

Видео What’s Inside The Box? (The Case Of) канала LegalEagle
Показать
Комментарии отсутствуют
Введите заголовок:

Введите адрес ссылки:

Введите адрес видео с YouTube:

Зарегистрируйтесь или войдите с
Информация о видео
29 февраля 2020 г. 20:28:48
00:19:19
Яндекс.Метрика