Week 5 Case on Point
pdf
keyboard_arrow_up
School
Regent University *
*We aren’t endorsed by this school
Course
MLAW-582
Subject
Law
Date
Jan 9, 2024
Type
Pages
4
Uploaded by kelasimon
Mckela L. Simon
Case On Point?
Due: 11/26/2023 11:59pm
Turn in on 11/25/23
Part I
For the following fact situations, use the statutory and case law presented in the hypothetical
libel case presented in the “Application” section of Chapter 12 (pg. 342-344). The case referred
to in the hypothetical is Goodman v. White. The question is whether the client has committed
defamation. Libel is written defamation; slander is oral defamation. For each fact situation,
determine if Goodman v. White is on point. Provide a brief explanation of your answer. For
example, if the key facts are not sufficiently similar, explain why they are not.
Question 1
a.
Are the key facts sufficiently similar for the court opinion to apply as precedent?
Yes , but only as persuasive precedent . Even though the key fact of defamation is in both
cases, Goodman v. White the key fact of defamation was libel and in the present case it was
slander .
b.
Are the rules of law sufficiently similar for the court opinion to apply as precedent?
Yes , the rule of law in Goodman v. White was broad enough in scope that it applies to a
different law or rule that governs the client ' s case . However , if the court opinion is used , it can
only be used as persuasive recent , not mandatory precedent.
c.
Is the case on point? Provide a brief explanation.
This case is on point because the key facts of the cases are similar enough and the rules of law,
the court opinion is broad enough in scope that it would apply to a different law or rule that
governs the client ' s case
Mckela L. Simon
Case On Point?
Due: 11/26/2023 11:59pm
Turn in on 11/25/23
Question 2
The client writes a letter to the local newspaper claiming that a local store intentionally sold her
defective merchandise. On the way to the post office to mail the letter, she runs into a friend, Jim.
After she tells Jim the story, he informs her that the merchandise is not defective, but rather that
she has simply misread the directions. The client does not mail the letter, but on the way home,
the letter falls out of the client’s pocket. A passerby finds the letter and puts it in the mail. The
local newspaper subsequently publishes the letter.
a.
Are the key facts sufficiently similar for the court opinion to apply as precedent?
No,
The court found that it was grossly negligent not to secure the letter in a safer place .
In the current case the letter simply fell out of the client 's pocket . The client put the letter in a
safe place . The fact that some other passerby mailed the letter is not gross negligence on the part
of our client .
b.
Are the rules of law sufficiently similar for the court opinion to apply as precedent?
No, because the key facts are too different. I
Goodman v. White t
here was gross
negligence by leaving the letter in plain view where anyone could read it but in the present case
the client put the letter in her pocket which would normally be safe.
c.
Is the case on point? Provide a brief explanation.
No, the case is not on point. The outcome in
Goodman v. White
was clear that gross negligence
took place. No judge would find a client guilty of negligence at all. The key facts are too
different in the two cases and would not be a good choice for an attorney to use as case on point
to rally their case.
Mckela L. Simon
Case On Point?
Due: 11/26/2023 11:59pm
Turn in on 11/25/23
Question 3
The client falsely believes that Alice, a college student, is a drug dealer. He mails her a letter,
addressed to “Alice,” claiming that she sells drugs to schoolchildren and should go to jail. Alice
shares an apartment with her boyfriend, a medical student. The client is aware of the fact that
Alice and her boyfriend occasionally open each other’s mail. When the letter arrives Alice’s
boyfriend opens and reads it.
a.
Are the key facts sufficiently similar for the court opinion to apply as precedent?
Yes, because the client addressed a letter to Alice and actually mailed it knowing it might be
opened by Alice's boyfriend. In
Goodman v. White,
the letter was never mailed but was left open
to the public to read. Client was negligent in his actions by actually mailing it with knowledge it
could be opened by her boyfriend and therefore Cox v. Redd would be precedent. The court in
Cox v Redd opined that the gross negligence amounted to libel as so many guests were able to
read the letter. Thus, in both cases libel has been committed.
b.
Are the rules of law sufficiently similar for the court opinion to apply as precedent?
Yes, in both
Goodman v. White,
and in the present case a letter was written and while one was
not mailed but was read by many, the court found the negligence of leaving the letter open to the
guests in the house amounted to libel. In our present case the letter was mailed and opened by
the intended person's boyfriend.
c.
Is the case on point? Provide a brief explanation.
The case is on point. The key facts are similar enough and the rules of law make it clear libel
was established with a letter that was not sent but read by many. It therefore stands to reason that
a letter that actually was sent would be libel.
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help
Mckela L. Simon
Case On Point?
Due: 11/26/2023 11:59pm
Turn in on 11/25/23
Part II
a.
Are the key facts sufficiently similar for the court opinion to apply as precedent?
The key facts are sufficiently similar for the court opinion to apply as precedent. In both cases a
resident is storing non-residential machinery on his property and using that machinery for
non-residential uses.
b.
Are the rules of law sufficiently similar for the court opinion to apply as precedent?
The rules of law are sufficiently similar to have the court use as precedent. In Baumgardner v
Stuckey, Superior Court of Pennsylvania (26 July 1999) the court found that it is not legal to
store non-residential goods such as tractors/trailers on residential property. This case began with
the restrictive covenants Stuckey was breaking. In the present case the same issue is at the heart
of the problem. Carter is storing non- residential items on his property, breaking the residential
covenants in place.
c.
Is the case on point? Provide a brief explanation.
This case is on point as the key facts are identical and the rules of law are exactly the same. This
is the kind of "case on point" every legal researcher wants to find.