<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Torts Law</title>
	<atom:link href="http://tortslaw.wordpress.com/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://tortslaw.wordpress.com</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 30 Dec 2008 06:26:44 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<cloud domain='tortslaw.wordpress.com' port='80' path='/?rsscloud=notify' registerProcedure='' protocol='http-post' />

			<item>
		<title>Examination of Proximate Cause in Shopkeeper Negligence</title>
		<link>http://tortslaw.wordpress.com/2008/12/30/proximate-cause-negligence/</link>
		<comments>http://tortslaw.wordpress.com/2008/12/30/proximate-cause-negligence/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 30 Dec 2008 06:26:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Torts Lawyer</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Torts Case Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[case law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[contributory negligence absent]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[history]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[jury function at trial]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[liability]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[news]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[opinion]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://tortslaw.wordpress.com/?p=285</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Now it is apparent that the defendant had notice of the existence of the syrup on the floor, by reason of the knowledge of its employee of such fact.
It is also apparent that the defendant through its employee took certain measures to remove the syrup, which, obviously, judging by the result, was a menace to [...]<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=tortslaw.wordpress.com&blog=5616244&post=285&subd=tortslaw&ref=&feed=1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://tortslaw.wordpress.com/2008/12/30/proximate-cause-negligence/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
	
		<media:content url="" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">Torts Lawyer</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>Negligent Deposit of Syrup in Grocery Store</title>
		<link>http://tortslaw.wordpress.com/2008/12/30/negligent-deposit-store/</link>
		<comments>http://tortslaw.wordpress.com/2008/12/30/negligent-deposit-store/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 30 Dec 2008 06:20:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Torts Lawyer</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Torts Case Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[case law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[history]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[lawsuit]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[negligence]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[negligence of defendant store]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[news]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[opinion]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://tortslaw.wordpress.com/?p=282</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Where a substance, dangerous to the safety of customers is deposited on the floor of a grocery store, and an employee uses certain measures to remove such substance, places some obstruction about the area involved, leaves the place otherwise unguarded without other notice or warning of the presence of the dangerous condition still remaining, a [...]<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=tortslaw.wordpress.com&blog=5616244&post=282&subd=tortslaw&ref=&feed=1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://tortslaw.wordpress.com/2008/12/30/negligent-deposit-store/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
	
		<media:content url="" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">Torts Lawyer</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>Alvak Enterprises Sought Injunction in Corporate Law Proceeding</title>
		<link>http://tortslaw.wordpress.com/2008/12/18/alvak-enterprises-injunction-corporate-law/</link>
		<comments>http://tortslaw.wordpress.com/2008/12/18/alvak-enterprises-injunction-corporate-law/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 18 Dec 2008 07:00:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Torts Lawyer</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Torts Case Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Alvak Enterprises sought injunction to prevent interference]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://tortslaw.wordpress.com/?p=267</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The plaintiff Alvak Enterprises, a California corporation, brought this action to enjoin the defendants Philip C. Phillips and Edith Phillips from interfering with the operation of a hotel owned by the corporation. The defendants answered and eventually, as directors, filed a second amended cross-complaint seeking dissolution of the corporation; a Milton Niemetz joined with them [...]<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=tortslaw.wordpress.com&blog=5616244&post=267&subd=tortslaw&ref=&feed=1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://tortslaw.wordpress.com/2008/12/18/alvak-enterprises-injunction-corporate-law/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
	
		<media:content url="" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">Torts Lawyer</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>Novo Applied to Show that Less Favorable Conflicting Fact Must Be Set Aside</title>
		<link>http://tortslaw.wordpress.com/2008/12/18/novo-applied-fact-set-aside/</link>
		<comments>http://tortslaw.wordpress.com/2008/12/18/novo-applied-fact-set-aside/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 18 Dec 2008 06:51:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Torts Lawyer</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Torts Case Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[court in Bales held charges inconsistent]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://tortslaw.wordpress.com/?p=264</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[When two findings of fact are in irreconcilable conflict the one less favorable to defendant must be set aside. In People v. Novo, defendant was originally charged with burglary and assault with intent to commit rape and was convicted of both second degree burglary and the assault. Since a necessary element of first degree burglary [...]<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=tortslaw.wordpress.com&blog=5616244&post=264&subd=tortslaw&ref=&feed=1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://tortslaw.wordpress.com/2008/12/18/novo-applied-fact-set-aside/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
	
		<media:content url="" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">Torts Lawyer</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>Court Holds That Firearm Is Deadly Weapon When Used as Club</title>
		<link>http://tortslaw.wordpress.com/2008/12/18/court-firearm-weapon/</link>
		<comments>http://tortslaw.wordpress.com/2008/12/18/court-firearm-weapon/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 18 Dec 2008 06:44:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Torts Lawyer</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Torts Case Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[defendant commited killing in commission of misdemeanor]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://tortslaw.wordpress.com/?p=261</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Knowing the gun to be loaded, defendant herein intentionally took it out of a place of comparative safety (a paper sack), putting it in his belt where it would be easily available to his use, and carried it into a crowded beer tavern, one of the most likely places in which an altercation could start. [...]<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=tortslaw.wordpress.com&blog=5616244&post=261&subd=tortslaw&ref=&feed=1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://tortslaw.wordpress.com/2008/12/18/court-firearm-weapon/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
	
		<media:content url="" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">Torts Lawyer</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>Double Jeopardy and Lesser Included Offense Issues</title>
		<link>http://tortslaw.wordpress.com/2008/12/18/double-jeopardy-lesser-included-offense-issues/</link>
		<comments>http://tortslaw.wordpress.com/2008/12/18/double-jeopardy-lesser-included-offense-issues/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 18 Dec 2008 06:32:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Torts Lawyer</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Torts Case Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[appelant sought reversal of criminal conviction]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://tortslaw.wordpress.com/?p=259</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[As an outgrowth of the interrogation of appellant and information subsequently obtained, a criminal complaint was filed in the municipal court of Alhambra charging appellant with &#8216;the misdemeanor offense of: violation section 11721, Health and Safety Code (Addicted to unlawful use of narcotics).&#8217; Appellant was convicted of addiction and sentenced to 180 days in the [...]<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=tortslaw.wordpress.com&blog=5616244&post=259&subd=tortslaw&ref=&feed=1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://tortslaw.wordpress.com/2008/12/18/double-jeopardy-lesser-included-offense-issues/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
	
		<media:content url="" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">Torts Lawyer</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>Mills v. Ruppert</title>
		<link>http://tortslaw.wordpress.com/2008/12/17/mills-v-ruppert/</link>
		<comments>http://tortslaw.wordpress.com/2008/12/17/mills-v-ruppert/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 17 Dec 2008 06:05:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Torts Lawyer</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Torts Case Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Mills sued Ruppert for breach of express covenant]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://tortslaw.wordpress.com/?p=257</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Helen C. Mills, lessee, commenced an action against the above-named defendants, lessors, to recover damages for defendants&#8217; alleged breach of an express covenant to keep in repair the exterior walls and roofs of the motel building. The complaint alleged that as a result of defendants&#8217; breach rain penetrated the walls causing damage consisting of: (a) [...]<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=tortslaw.wordpress.com&blog=5616244&post=257&subd=tortslaw&ref=&feed=1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://tortslaw.wordpress.com/2008/12/17/mills-v-ruppert/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
	
		<media:content url="" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">Torts Lawyer</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>People v. Torres</title>
		<link>http://tortslaw.wordpress.com/2008/12/17/people-v-torres/</link>
		<comments>http://tortslaw.wordpress.com/2008/12/17/people-v-torres/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 17 Dec 2008 05:32:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Torts Lawyer</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Torts Case Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Torres charged with four violations of California Vehicle Code]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://tortslaw.wordpress.com/?p=255</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Appellant was charged in four counts in an information with violations of section 501 of the California Vehicle Code. He entered a plea of not guilty to all counts, waived trial by jury, and was found guilty on all four counts by the court. He was granted three years probation, conditioned upon his serving ninety [...]<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=tortslaw.wordpress.com&blog=5616244&post=255&subd=tortslaw&ref=&feed=1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://tortslaw.wordpress.com/2008/12/17/people-v-torres/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
	
		<media:content url="" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">Torts Lawyer</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>People v. Loeper</title>
		<link>http://tortslaw.wordpress.com/2008/12/17/people-v-loeper/</link>
		<comments>http://tortslaw.wordpress.com/2008/12/17/people-v-loeper/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 17 Dec 2008 05:17:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Torts Lawyer</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Torts Case Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Loeper charged with violation of Health and Safety Code]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://tortslaw.wordpress.com/?p=252</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Defendant-appellant Loeper, together with one Vincent Quintero, were charged in an amended grand jury indictment that on December 9, 1957, they did feloniously sell a narcotic (marijuana) in violation of Health and Safety Code section 11500. Appellant was charged with two prior convictions of felonies (burglary and escape from state prison). He pleaded not guilty [...]<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=tortslaw.wordpress.com&blog=5616244&post=252&subd=tortslaw&ref=&feed=1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://tortslaw.wordpress.com/2008/12/17/people-v-loeper/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
	
		<media:content url="" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">Torts Lawyer</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>Hutton v. Pagni</title>
		<link>http://tortslaw.wordpress.com/2008/12/17/hutton-v-pagni/</link>
		<comments>http://tortslaw.wordpress.com/2008/12/17/hutton-v-pagni/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 17 Dec 2008 05:10:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Torts Lawyer</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Torts Case Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Hutton sued Pagni in negligence under res ipsa loquitur]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://tortslaw.wordpress.com/?p=250</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[This is an appeal from an order of the trial court granting plaintiff&#8217;s motion for a new trial after a defense verdict. There is also presented a cross-appeal taken by plaintiff from the judgment entered upon the defense verdict.
The stated ground upon which the new trial was granted was insufficiency of the evidence to support [...]<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=tortslaw.wordpress.com&blog=5616244&post=250&subd=tortslaw&ref=&feed=1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://tortslaw.wordpress.com/2008/12/17/hutton-v-pagni/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
	
		<media:content url="" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">Torts Lawyer</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
	</channel>
</rss>