Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 434 views

    Case Synthesis

    Uploaded by

    MylaCambri
    The three cases establish the rule that a child can be found contributorily negligent if: 1) The child fails to use the level of care that would be expected of a reasonably prudent child of the same age, intelligence, and experience in the same circumstances. 2) The child's failure to use reasonable care contributes to the injury. 3) The level of care expected is determined based on the child's maturity and capacity to understand and avoid risks or dangers. Young children are not expected to exercise the same degree of care and caution as older children.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Case Synthesis

    Uploaded by

    MylaCambri
    434 views1 page
    The three cases establish the rule that a child can be found contributorily negligent if: 1) The child fails to use the level of care that would be expected of a reasonably prudent child of the same age, intelligence, and experience in the same circumstances. 2) The child's failure to use reasonable care contributes to the injury. 3) The level of care expected is determined based on the child's maturity and capacity to understand and avoid risks or dangers. Young children are not expected to exercise the same degree of care and caution as older children.

    Original Description:

    case

    Original Title

    Case Synthesis (2)

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The three cases establish the rule that a child can be found contributorily negligent if: 1) The child fails to use the level of care that would be expected of a reasonably prudent child of the same age, intelligence, and experience in the same circumstances. 2) The child's failure to use reasonable care contributes to the injury. 3) The level of care expected is determined based on the child's maturity and capacity to understand and avoid risks or dangers. Young children are not expected to exercise the same degree of care and caution as older children.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    434 views1 page

    Case Synthesis

    Uploaded by

    MylaCambri
    The three cases establish the rule that a child can be found contributorily negligent if: 1) The child fails to use the level of care that would be expected of a reasonably prudent child of the same age, intelligence, and experience in the same circumstances. 2) The child's failure to use reasonable care contributes to the injury. 3) The level of care expected is determined based on the child's maturity and capacity to understand and avoid risks or dangers. Young children are not expected to exercise the same degree of care and caution as older children.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 1

    ASSIGNMENT: CASE SYNTHESIS

    INSTRUCTIONS:
    Please prepare a 2 (single spaced) page synthesis of the law as to when a child can be found contributorily
    negligent, as it may be deduced from the following three cases ONLY (i.e. not any lower or higher court
    decisions in any of these cases or subsequent considerations of these cases):
    Yachuk v. The 0liver Blais Company Limited et al., [1945] O.R. 18-35 (C.A.)
    Joyal v. Barsby (1965), 55 D.L.R. (2d) 38 (Man. C.A.)
    Ottosen v. Kasper, [1986] B.C.J. No. 139 (B.C.C.A.)
    You may adopt the format that you find most useful. However, the objective is to have a concise and general
    statement of the rule of law that is still comprehensive and informative. I suggest that you aim to produce a
    statement of the rule of law that resembles the textual fusion of rules example at p. 36 of the McCallum book.
    Feel free to adapt that style to your own purposes.
    The synthesis will be due in class on Oct. 6, 2010.
    ABOUT CASE SYNTHESIS
    The purpose of learning how to synthesize cases is to enable you to extract a comprehensive picture of a legal
    rule from a group of cases, all of which deal with the rule or different aspects of the rule in different factual
    contexts.
    Since different cases may each contribute different insight into a particular rule or principle (for example, by
    adding qualifications, conditions or exceptions), it can be very useful to extract their essential points and to
    blend them with each other for a more complete picture of the rule.
    A careful and correct summary of the legal rule will assist you in predicting how that rule would apply in other
    factual contexts.
    For the purposes of this assignment, you are being provided with a set of cases. In a real research situation, you
    would likely have to find the relevant cases yourself. The research training you are receiving through the library
    should provide background on how you would go about finding cases. This assignment picks up at the point
    where you have gathered the cases, and are ready to go about analyzing them.
    The process of synthesizing cases involves the following steps.
    1) Careful reading of the cases and identification of the rules of law contained within them.
    2) Identification of the hierarchy of cases. Are any of the cases leading cases? Are some of them from
    higher levels of courts? Are some of them newer cases that refer to the older ones?
    3) Comparison of the cases, identification of elements of the rules of law that are common to all cases.
    Restate the common parts of the rules of law in general terms, but be careful not to over-generalize such
    that the rules are stretched beyond their comfortable scope.
    4) Identification of the elements of the rules of law that are present in some cases but not in others. You
    should identify why those parts are not shared. For example, the facts of a particular case may have
    caused the court to consider an extra dimension that did not come up on the facts of another case. In
    such a case, the extra dimension may be added as an extension to the rule. Sometimes, however, the
    extra element would only be applicable in a subset of cases, and should be identified as such.
    5) Identification of contradictions in the rules of law. Again, identify why there appear to be
    contradictions. Can the differences be explained by differences in the facts, or do the cases actually
    disagree. If they do actually disagree, clearly identify the levels of court, the jurisdictions and the dates
    of the cases on either side and note the points of disagreement. This will assist you in guessing what a
    court in your jurisdiction is likely to do in subsequent cases.

    You might also like