Solution Manual For Tort Law 7th Edition J. Stanley Edwards, J.D.Traci L. Cull, J.D Chapter 1-19 (Complete And Verified Study material) (720pages) LEARNEXAMS

SUGGESTED DISCUSSION Since your discussion of Chapter 1 will probably be your first, or at least one of your first, discussions in this class, you might want to do some kind of exercise beforehand that will serve to ―break the ice.‖ If you want your students to feel comfortable participating, you must create an atmosphere of trust and acceptance. Since most people‘s favorite topic is themselves, a good exercise is having them introduce themselves by telling about their career goals, their educational and work experiences, their hobbies and interests, and/or their motivation for becoming legal assistants. Have them tell something about themselves that most people don‘t know. Alternatively, you can put them in pairs and have them introduce each other. Questions such as What do you like best about yourself? or What is your favorite animal (movie, song, food, cartoon character, etc.)? enliven the discussion. No matter what questions are asked, students will have an opportunity to break the ―sound barrier‖ by expressing themselves at least once in class without any threat of censure. Once you have made an effort to make the students feel comfortable, you might open your discussion of tort law with a consideration of some policy questions. Policy questions are some of the most intriguing questions that arise in tort law. A key question that has plagued practitioners and academicians is the question regarding the distribution of losses. Students need to identify their particular biases in answering this question. Do they think, for example, that anyone who injures another, whether intentionally, negligently, or without any fault, should be responsible for compensating the victim? Or do they believe that victims should have to bear their own losses if no one is morally responsible for the harm that occurred to them? Consideration of these questions will allow them to better understand their reactions to the courts‘ decisions that they read throughout the semester, as well as the lack of consensus among their peers, as to how disputes should be resolved. Therefore, time spent at the beginning of the semester (quarter) dealing with this basic philosophical premise is time well spent. To give you some idea of students‘ perspective on this issue, as well as some insight into their writing abilities, you might have them write a one- or two-page paper addressing this question in the context of a hypothetical. Consider the following scenarios or the questions raised at the beginning of the chapter as possible contexts in which to raise this question.  A twelve-year-old child whose parents are chronic smokers develops a severe case of asthma, which a medical doctor ascribes, in part, to t h e i r exposure to secondhand smoke. Medical studies are available to prove the deleterious effects of secondhand smoke. Should the cigarette manufacturer and/or the parents be held liable for the child‘s injuries? 1A psychotherapist interviews a young person who is exhibiting agitated and aberrant behavior and determines that this condition can be controlled by medication and declines to institutionalize them. The mother begs the psychotherapist to hospitalize her child because she fears they are potentially violent. A week later the young person kills their mother while suffering from delusional behavior. Should the psychotherapist be held liable for the woman‘s death?  Two neighbors become involved in a shouting match. One neighbor is aware that the other has a heart condition but continues to argue even when the man with the heart condition becomes extremely agitated. The argument ends abruptly when the man with the heart condition succumbs to a heart attack, which, although not fatal, renders him incapacitated for the remainder of his life. Should the neighbor be held