Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 6 of 6
Full-Text Articles in Law
Torts—Landowner's Liability To Servants Of Independent Contractors, Dwayne Coople
Torts—Landowner's Liability To Servants Of Independent Contractors, Dwayne Coople
Washington Law Review
In Murk v. Aronsen the Washington Supreme Court had occasion to consider a landowner's tort liability where work is placed under the control of an independent contractor. In a 5-to-4 decision the court held that an owner is not liable to a contractor's servant injured by the negligence of a contractor who has control of the premises. By its decision the court has reaffirmed its earlier position, despite a trend toward expanding the exceptions to the rule of non-liability for torts of independent contractors.
Torts—Interspousal Actions—Personal Torts, Richard H. Williams
Torts—Interspousal Actions—Personal Torts, Richard H. Williams
Washington Law Review
In Goode v. Martinis, the Washington Supreme Court held that a wife has a cause of action in tort for an assault committed upon her by her husband while the parties are legally separated and divorce proceedings are pending. While restricting its holdings to the particular facts, the court rejected the rationale advanced in favor of the common law doctrine of spousal disability.
Torts—Occupier's Liability—The Licensee And Invitee In Washington, Dick Steincipher
Torts—Occupier's Liability—The Licensee And Invitee In Washington, Dick Steincipher
Washington Law Review
Since their development by the English court in Indermaur v. Dames, the categories of trespasser, licensee and invitee have played a significant role in the law of torts. Though they were founded upon nineteenth century notions of liability, and reflect an age which had not yet discarded the feudal principles of landowner's sovereignty, these distinctions have persisted, plaguing courts and litigants alike. While other archaic rules have fallen before the demands of our industrial complex and rising social consciousness, these classifications have endured. Since few valid reasons can be given for their longevity, the distinctions are slowly losing standing under …
Torts—Tavernkeeper's Liability For Act Of Guest, Stanley H. Barer
Torts—Tavernkeeper's Liability For Act Of Guest, Stanley H. Barer
Washington Law Review
In Miller v. Staton, the members of the Washington Supreme Court disagree on how properly to apply the general rule that a tavernkeeper "owes the duty to his guests to exercise reasonable care to protect them from injury at the hands of a fellow guest."
Torts—Evidence Of Lack Of Malice By Defendant To Mitigate Damage In Defamation Action, John H. Binns, Jr.
Torts—Evidence Of Lack Of Malice By Defendant To Mitigate Damage In Defamation Action, John H. Binns, Jr.
Washington Law Review
Prior to the appearance of Farrar v. Tribune Publishing Co., it appeared reasonably clear that in defamation actions, evidence of the defendant's malice or good faith was not admissible for the purpose of enhancing or mitigating damages. Since malice is not an essential element of civil libel or slander, evidence of malice was considered immaterial and hence inadmissible under the Washington rule prohibiting punitive or exemplary damages. The actual malice of the defendant was considered relevant only in those actions which involved overcoming a qualified privilege. Farrar seems to have changed or at least obscured the clarity of these rules.
Torts—Recovery For Suicide—Wrongful Death, Hartley Paul
Torts—Recovery For Suicide—Wrongful Death, Hartley Paul
Washington Law Review
The Washington Supreme Court, by a 5-to-4 decision in Orcutt v. Spokane County, made possible recovery by wrongful death action for negligent conduct resulting in suicide.