university of west los angeles school of paralegal studies

University of West Los AngelesSchool of Paralegal Studies Course 232

Remedies and Enforcement of JudgmentsScott F. Pearce, Esq.

Session Two Materials

Remedies and Enforcement of Judgments - Session Two

TORTS APPROACH

I. Identify the plaintiff's injury. (Be specific.)

II. Who is responsible for plaintiff's injury? (The charged defendant or somebody else?)

III. What is plaintiff's theory (or theories) for recovery?

A. Injuries to plaintiff's person

1. Assault

2. Battery

3. False Imprisonment

B. Injuries to plaintiff's property

1. Trespass

a. Trespass to Land

b. Trespass to Chattels

2. Conversion

C. Injuries to Intangible Interests

1. Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress

2. The Business Torts (Fraud and Interference)

3. Defamation (Note: Constitutional law crossover - 1st Amendment defense)

a. Slander

b. Libel

c. 1 Amendment Defensest

4. Invasion of Privacy

Remedies and Enforcement of Judgments - Session Two

a. Commercial Appropriation

b. False Light

c. Public Disclosure of Private Facts

d. Intrusion on Seclusion

D. Negligence

E. Nuisance (Public and Private)

F. Strict Liability

G. Products Liability

1. Strict Liability

2. Negligence

3. Warranty

IV. What are defendant's defenses?

A. Contributory Negligence

B. Assumption of Risk

V. Remedies

A. Damages (Compensatory and Punitive)

B. Restitution

C. Equitable Relief (Temporary and Permanent Injunctions)

1. Inadequate Legal Remedy

2. Property Right

3. Feasibility

4. Balancing

5. Defenses

Remedies & Enforcement of JudgmentsSession #2: Torts Damages

· Intentional torts to the person: Even nominal actual damages give rise to a cause of action that

may include punitive damages.

· Intentional infliction of emotional distress requires actual, not nominal damages. Severe

emotional distress is good enough to qualify. The more outrageous the conduct, the less need to

show actual damages.

· Trespass to Chattels requires actual damages, either to the chattel or to the plaintiff's right to

possession of the chattels.

· Conversion can be compensated with damages, measured as fair market value at the time of the

conversion. It can also be subject to replevin, which would return the property to the plaintiff.

· Invasion of Privacy (commercial appropriation, false light, intrusion into seclusion, publication of

private facts) does not require proof of special damages.

· Negligence is a particularly complicated topic. Liability for breach of duty is harder to figure out

than the damages suffered by the plaintiff. There are six areas in which damages can be relevant

in a negligence analysis:

· personal injury: past, present and future damages, foreseeability of extent of harm

irrelevant.

· property damage: cost of repair, or cost to replace at the time of the incident

· punitive damages: only available if defendant's conduct is wanton and willful, reckless or

malicious (no punitive damages if mere negligence)

· non-recoverable items: interest from the date of injury, attorney fees

· duty to mitigate: plaintiff must take all reasonable steps available

· collateral source rule: damages are not reduced because plaintiff is compensated from

another source, such as health insurance. Plaintiffs are not allowed to recover damages

from different plaintiffs for the same injuries in cases with joint liability.

· Products liability cases based on negligence or strict liability require a showing of personal

injury or property damage, not "pure economic loss"

· Pure economic loss is not recoverable in negligence, generally speaking.

· Pure economic loss is recoverable in products liability cases involving a breach of the

warranties of merchantability and fitness for a particular purpose.

Remedies & Enforcement of Judgments - Torts Damages - Hypothetical #1

REMEDIES & ENFORCEMENT OF JUDGMENTS

Session 2 - Torts Damages - Hypothetical #1

Owner hired Plummer, a plumbing contractor, to repair the plumbing in a store that Owner plannedto lease. In performing the repair, Plummer used a connector on a hot water pipe made of a differentmetal than the pipe itself. As a result of the incompatibility of the two metals, the connectorcorroded and weakened. This condition was not obvious because the weakened connection waslocated within a wall. After the repair was completed, the store was leased to Amy's, a swimwearretailer.

Two years after Plummer finished the repairs, the connector burst. Hot water broke through the walland sprayed into the store, scalding Carrie, a customer who was in the store at the time. The wateralso ruined swimsuits on display in the store. While repairs were being made, Amy's had to closefor two months during the summer, causing significant financial loss. Emma, an employee of Amy's,lost her job because of the closure.

1. What rights, if any, does Carrie have against Owner and against Plummer? Discuss.

2. What rights, if any, does Amy's have against Plummer? Discuss.

3. What rights, if any, does Emma have against Owner and against Plummer? Discuss.

Remedies & Enforcement of Judgments - Torts Damages - Hypothetical #1



Outline of Issues

I. Carrie v. Owner

A. Negligence1. Owner's duty of care as a landlord2. Owner's vicarious liability for Plummer's negligence

II. Carrie v. Plummer

A. Negligence1. Reasonable plumber standard of care2. Carrie's injuries are foreseeable.3. The passing of time does not break the chain of causation.

III. Amy's v. Plummer

A. Negligence - The key issue here is damages.1. Lost swimsuits and other property damage are recoverable.2. It may be hard to calculate lost profits.

IV. Emma v. Owner

A. Negligent Interference With Contract1. Emma may not be able to show a breach of duty.2. Emma may not be a foreseeable plaintiff.3. Emma's injuries may not be foreseeable.4. Emma's lost wages are pure economic damages.

V. Emma v. Plummer: No recovery; incorporation by reference of Carrie v. Plummer for duty and breach, and Emma v. Owner for causation.

Remedies & Enforcement of Judgments - Session 2 - Hypothetical 2



Paul recently moved into the area to open a new restaurant. After months of searching for a personalresidence, Paul offered to purchase Seller's house. With his new restaurant soon to open, Paul hiredChef to head up his kitchen staff under an agreement that allows either party to terminate theemployment relationship on thirty days' notice. Paul entered into a written three-year contract withMeatco, a food supplier, for regular weekly deliveries of high quality meat.

Dan, owner of ten restaurants, learned about all of the above and resolved to do all he could to hinderthe operation of Paul's new restaurant. Dan offered Chef double his current salary and told Chef thatif he did not quit his job with Paul, "I can make it difficult for you to get your next job. I have manyrestaurant connections all over the country, you know."

Dan wrote to Meatco: "It has come to my attention that you are currently supplying Paul. In allcandor, I must tell you that so long as you continue to do so, I will not deal with you once ourcontract ends in two weeks."

Dan then offered Seller a much higher price for his house than that offered by Paul, hoping thatrecommencing a house search would divert Paul's attention from operating his restaurant.

Chef terminated his employment with Paul and went to work for Dan. Meatco stopped deliveriesto Paul. Seller accepted Dan's offer for the house.

Paul's restaurant opened but incurred significant losses. Paul's reputation in the restaurantcommunity was adversely affected. Meanwhile, Dan's restaurants flourished.

Paul sues Dan.

What are Paul's rights and remedies, if any, against Dan? Discuss.

Remedies & Enforcement of Judgments - Session 2 - Hypothetical 2



Outline of Issues

I. Paul's Rights: Tortious Interference With Contracts

A. Chef: Inducing Breach of Contract

B. Meatco: Interference With Contract

C. House: Interference With Prospective Advantage

II. Paul's Remedies

A. Damages

1. Chef's Contract

2. Meatco Contract

3. House Contract

4. Damage to Paul's Reputation

B. Restitution

C. Injunctive Relief

D. Conclusion



Peters, a suburban homeowner, decided to resurface with bricks the concrete area surrounding hispool. He purchased from Homeco, a local home improvement store, a concrete cutter manufacturedby Conco, which had a blade manufactured by Bladeco. He then took the concrete cutter home andassembled it following the instructions provided by Conco.

The blade that Peters purchased was clearly labeled “Wet.” Although no instructions or warningscame with the blade, Conco included several warnings throughout the instructions to the concretecutter stating, “If using a wet blade, frequently water the blade and surface being cut to avoid riskof blade degradation.” No other warnings relating to the blade were included with the concretecutter.

Peters began cutting the concrete with the concrete cutter without using water. Less than fiveminutes into the job he noticed that the cutter was vibrating excessively. He turned the machine offby hitting the “kill switch” located near the blade at the bottom of the cutter, with his right foot. Thecutter’s handle did not have a “kill switch.” After carefully examining the concrete cutter and blade,Peters became convinced that nothing was wrong and continued to operate it. Nevertheless, withinseconds, the concrete cutter again began vibrating violently.

As Peters reached with his right foot to hit the “kill switch” again, the blade broke into pieces, forcedoff the cutter’s safety guard, spiraled into Peter’s right foot and caused permanent injuries.

On what theory or theories might Peters recover damages from and what defenses may reasonablybe raised by:

1. Conco? Discuss.

2. Bladeco? Discuss.

3. Homeco? Discuss.



Outline of Issues

I. Peters v. Conco: Products Liability

A. Strict Liability1. Design or Manufacturing Defect2. Inadequate Warning3. Damages4. Defenses

B. Negligence1. Duty2. Breach3. Causation4. Damages5. Defenses

a. Contributory or Comparative Negligenceb. Assumption of Risk

C. WarrantyD. Conclusion

II. Peters v. Bladeco

A. Strict LiabilityB. NegligenceC. WarrantyD. DefensesE. Conclusion

III. Peters v. Homeco

A. Strict LiabilityB. NegligenceC. WarrantyD. DefensesE. Conclusion

COMPLAINT—Personal Injury, PropertyDamage, Wrongful Death

ATTORNEY OR PARTY WITHOUT ATTORNEY (Name, state bar number, and address): FOR COURT USE ONLY

ATTORNEY FOR (Name):

PLAINTIFF:

DEFENDANT:

DOES 1 TO

CASE NUMBER:

COMPLAINT—Personal Injury, Property Damage, Wrongful Death

MOTOR VEHICLE OTHER (specify):Property Damage Wrongful Death

Other Damages (specify):

This pleading, including attachments and exhibits, consists of the following number of pages:

Each plaintiff named above is a competent adultexcept plaintiff (name):

a corporation qualified to do business in California

a minor an adultfor whom a guardian or conservator of the estate or a guardian ad litem has been appointed

other (specify):

except plaintiff (name):a corporation qualified to do business in California

a minor an adultfor whom a guardian or conservator of the estate or a guardian ad litem has been appointed

other (specify):

Information about additional plaintiffs who are not competent adults is shown in Complaint—Attachment 3.

Form Approved for Optional UseJudicial Council of California982.1(1) [Rev. July 1, 2002]

Code of Civil Procedure, § 425.12

982.1(1)

TELEPHONE NO:

STREET ADDRESS:

MAILING ADDRESS:

CITY AND ZIP CODE:

NAME OF COURT:

BRANCH NAME:

Type (check all that apply):

Jurisdiction (check all that apply):ACTION IS A LIMITED CIVIL CASE

does not exceed $10,000exceeds $10,000, but does not exceed $25,000

2.

3.a.

(1)(2) an unincorporated entity (describe):(3) a public entity (describe):(4)

(a)(b) other (specify):

(5)

b.(1)(2)(3)(4)

an unincorporated entity (describe):a public entity (describe):

(a)other (specify):(b)

(5)

Page 1 of 3

Amount demanded

FAX NO. (Optional):

E-MAIL ADDRESS (Optional):

AMENDED (Number):

ACTION IS AN UNLIMITED CIVIL CASE (exceeds $25,000)

Personal Injury

ACTION IS RECLASSIFIED by this amended complaintfrom limited to unlimitedfrom unlimited to limited

PLAINTIFF (name):

alleges causes of action against DEFENDANT (name):

1.


SHORT TITLE: CASE NUMBER:

Each defendant named above is a natural personexcept defendant (name):except defendant (name):

a business organization, form unknowna business organization, form unknowna corporationan unincorporated entity (describe):an unincorporated entity (describe):

a public entity (describe): a public entity (describe):

other (specify):other (specify):

except defendant (name):except defendant (name):

The true names and capacities of defendants sued as Does are unknown to plaintiff.

7. Defendants who are joined pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 382 are (names):

Plaintiff is required to comply with a claims statute, and9.a. plaintiff has complied with applicable claims statutes, orb.

This court is the proper court because

injury to person or damage to personal property occurred in its jurisdictional area.other (specify):

Page 2 of 3982.1(1) [Rev. July 1, 2002]

5.a. c.

(1)a corporation(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

(1)(2)(3)

(4)

(5)

b. d.a business organization, form unknown

an unincorporated entity (describe):

a public entity (describe):

other (specify):

(1)a corporation(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

a business organization, form unknowna corporationan unincorporated entity (describe):


other (specify):

(1)(2)(3)

(4)

(5)

Information about additional defendants who are not natural persons is contained in Complaint—Attachment 5.

6.

plaintiff is excused from complying because (specify):

8.at least one defendant now resides in its jurisdictional area.the principal place of business of a defendant corporation or unincorporated association is in its jurisdictional area.

a.

b.c.

d.

4. Plaintiff (name):is doing business under the fictitious name (specify):

and has complied with the fictitious business name laws.


CAUSE OF ACTION—Motor Vehicle Page(number)

Cross-ComplaintATTACHMENT TO Complaint

(Use a separate cause of action form for each cause of action.)

Plaintiff (name):

Plaintiff alleges the acts of defendants were negligent; the acts were the legal (proximate) cause of injuriesand damages to plaintiff; the acts occurred

on (date):at (place):

MV-2. DEFENDANTS

The defendants who operated a motor vehicle are (names):a.

Does tob. The defendants who employed the persons who operated a motor vehicle in the course of their employment

are (names):

Does toThe defendants who owned the motor vehicle which was operated with their permission are (names):c.

Does tod. The defendants who entrusted the motor vehicle are (names):

Does toe. The defendants who were the agents and employees of the other defendants and acted within the scope

of the agency were (names):

Does tof. The defendants who are liable to plaintiffs for other reasons and the reasons for the liability are

listed in Attachment MV-2f as follows:

Does to

Form Approved by theJudicial Council of California

Effective January 1, 1982Rule 982.1(2) CAUSE OF ACTION—Motor Vehicle CCP 425.12

MV-1.


Plaintiff has suffered

loss of use of propertywage loss

hospital and medical expensesgeneral damage

loss of earning capacity

The relief sought in this complaint is within the jurisdiction of this court.

PLAINTIFF PRAYS for judgment for costs of suit; for such relief as is fair, just, and equitable; and forcompensatory damages

according to proof

The following causes of action are attached and the statements above apply to each (each complaint must have one or more causes of action attached):

Motor VehicleGeneral NegligenceIntentional TortProducts LiabilityPremises LiabilityOther (specify):

Page 3 of 3982.1(1) [Rev. July 1, 2002]

11.

13.

14.

10.

(SIGNATURE OF PLAINTIFF OR ATTORNEY)(TYPE OR PRINT NAME)

a.

c.

e.

g.

property damage

other damage (specify):

b.

d.

f.

a.

(1)(2) in the amount of: $ .

b.

a.b.c.d.e.f.

Date:


The damages claimed for wrongful death and the relationships of plaintiff to the deceased are12.

as follows:listed in Complaint—Attachment 12.a.

b.

The paragraphs of this complaint alleged on information and belief are as follows (specify paragraph numbers):15.

punitive damagesThe amount of damages is (you must check (1) in cases for personal injury or wrongful death):

(1)(2)


CAUSE OF ACTION—lntentional Tort Page(number)



IT-1 . Plaintiff (name):

alleges that defendant (name):

Does to

was the legal (proximate) cause of damages to plaintiff. By the following acts or omissions to act, defendant intentionally caused the damage to plaintiffon (date):at (place):

(description of reasons for liability):


Effective January 1, 1982Rule 982.1(4) CAUSE OF ACTION—Intentional Tort CCP 425.12


CAUSE OF ACTION—General Negligence Page(number)



GN-1. Plaintiff (name):

alleges that defendant (name):

toDoes

was the legal (proximate) cause of damages to plaintiff. By the following acts or omissions to act, defendantnegligently caused the damage to plaintiffon (date):at (place):

(description of reasons for liability):


Effective January 1, 1982Rule 982.1(3) CAUSE OF ACTION—General Negligence CCP 425.12


CAUSE OF ACTION—Products Liability Page(number)

Cross-ComplaintComplaintATTACHMENT TO


Plaintiff (name):

plaintiff was injured by the following product:Prod.L-1. On or about (date):

Prod.L-2. Each of the defendants knew the product would be purchased and used without inspection for defects.The product was defective when it left the control of each defendant. The product at the time of injurywas being

used in the manner intended by the defendantsused in a manner that was reasonably foreseeable by defendants as involving a substantial danger notreadily apparent. Adequate warnings of the danger were not given.

Prod.L-3. Plaintiff was apurchaser of the product.bystander to the use of the product.

user of the product.other (specify):

PLAINTIFF'S INJURY WAS THE LEGAL (PROXIMATE) RESULT OF THE FOLLOWING:

Count One—Strict liability of the following defendants whoProd.L-4.manufactured or assembled the product (names):a.

Does todesigned and manufactured component parts supplied to the manufacturer (names):b.

Does tosold the product to the public (names):c.

toDoesProd.L-5. Count Two—Negligence of the following defendants who owed a duty to plaintiff (names):

toDoesProd.L-6. Count Three—Breach of warranty by the following defendants (names):

Does toa. who breached an implied warranty

who breached an express warranty which wasb.oralwritten

The defendants who are liable to plaintiffs for other reasons and the reasons for the liability areProd.L-7.listed in Attachment—Prod.L-7 as follows:


Effective January 1, 1982Rule 982.1(6) CAUSE OF ACTION—Products Liability CCP 425.12


CAUSE OF ACTION—Premises Liability Page(number)



Prem.L-1. Plaintiff (name):alleges the acts of defendants were the legal (proximate) cause of damages to plaintiff.On (date): plaintiff was injured on the following premises in the following

fashion (description of premises and circumstances of injury):

Prem.L-2. Count One—Negligence The defendants who negligently owned, maintained, managed and operatedthe described premises were (names):

Does to

Prem.L-3. Count Two—Willful Failure to Warn [Civil Code section 846] The defendant owners who willfully or maliciously failed to guard or warn against a dangerous condition, use, structure, or activity were(names):

Does toPlaintiff, a recreational user, was a paying guest.an invited guest

Count Three—Dangerous Condition of Public Property The defendants who owned public propertyon which a dangerous condition existed were (names):

Prem.L-4.

Does toconstructive notice of the existence of thea. actualThe defendant public entity had

dangerous condition in sufficient time prior to the injury to have corrected it.The condition was created by employees of the defendant public entity.b.

Allegations about Other Defendants The defendants who were the agents and employees of theother defendants and acted within the scope of the agency were (names):

Prem.L-5. a.

Does toThe defendants who are liable to plaintiffs for other reasons and the reasons for their liability areb.

as follows (names):described in attachment Prem.L-5.b


Effective January 1, 1982Rule 982.1(5) CAUSE OF ACTION—Premises Liability CCP 425.12


Exemplary Damages Attachment Page


EX-1. As additional damages against defendant (name):

Plaintiff alleges defendant was guilty ofmalicefraudoppression

as defined in Civil Code section 3294, and plaintiff should recover, in addition to actual damages, damagesto make an example of and to punish defendant.

EX-2. The facts supporting plaintiff's claim are as follows:

EX-3. The amount of exemplary damages sought is

a. not shown, pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 425.10.b. $


Effective January 1, 1982Rule 982.1(13) Exemplary Damages Attachment CCP 425.12

ATTORNEY OR PARTY WITHOUT ATTORNEY (NAME AND ADDRESS): TELEPHONE: FOR COURT USE ONLY

ATTORNEY FOR (NAME):

Insert name of court, judicial district or branch court, if any, and post office and street address:

PLAINTIFF:

DEFENDANT:

CASE NUMBER:

ANSWER—Personal Injury, Property Damage, Wrongful Death

COMPLAINT OF (name):CROSS-COMPLAINT OF (name):

1. This pleading, including attachments and exhibits, consists of the following number of pages:

DEFENDANT OR CROSS-DEFENDANT (name):

Generally denies each allegation of the unverified complaint or cross-complaint.2.

3. a. DENIES each allegation of the following numbered paragraphs:

ADMITS each allegation of the following numbered paragraphs:b.

DENIES, ON INFORMATION AND BELIEF, each allegation of the following numbered paragraphs:c.

DENIES, BECAUSE OF LACK OF SUFFICIENT INFORMATION OR BELIEF TO ANSWER, each allegation of the following numbered paragraphs:

d.

ADMITS the following allegations and generally denies all other allegations:

(Continued)


Effective January 1, 1982Rule 982.1(15)

ANSWER—Personal Injury, Property Damage,Wrongful Death CCP 425.12

e.


ANSWER—Personal Injury, Property Damage, Wrongful Death Page two

f. DENIES the following allegations and admits all other allegations:

Other (specify):g.

AFFIRMATIVELY ALLEGES AS A DEFENSEThe comparative fault of plaintiff or cross-complainant (name):as follows:

4.

The expiration of the Statute of Limitations as follows:5.

Other (specify):6.

DEFENDANT OR CROSS-DEFENDANT PRAYSFor costs of suit and that plaintiff or cross-complainant take nothing.

Other (specify):

[982.1(15)] Page two

7.

(Signature of party or attorney)(Type or print name). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

CROSS-COMPLAINT—Personal Injury,Property Damage, Wrongful Death

ATTORNEY OR PARTY WITHOUT ATTORNEY (Name, state bar number, and address): FOR COURT USE ONLY

SHORT TITLE:

CROSS-COMPLAINANT:

CROSS-DEFENDANT:

CASE NUMBER:

CROSS-COMPLAINT—Personal Injury, Property Damage, Wrongful Death

Apportionment of Fault Declaratory Relief

This pleading, including exhibits and attachments, consists of the following number of pages:

CROSS-COMPLAINANT (name):

alleges causes of action against CROSS-DEFENDANT (name):

Each cross-complainant named above is a competent adultexcept cross-complainant (name):

a corporation qualified to do business in California

an adulta minorfor whom a guardian or conservator of the estate or a guardian ad litem has been appointed

other (specify):

(Continued on reverse)

Form Approved for Optional UseJudicial Council of California

982.1(14) [Rev. January 1, 2001]

Code of Civil Procedure, § 425.12

982.1(14)

ATTORNEY FOR (Name):

TELEPHONE NO:

STREET ADDRESS:

MAILING ADDRESS:

CITY AND ZIP CODE:

BRANCH NAME:

DOES 1 TO

Other (specify):Indemnification

ACTION IS A LIMITED CIVIL CASE ($25,000 or less)

2.

3.a.

(1)an unincorporated entity (describe):a public entity (describe):

(2)(3)(4)

other (specify):(a)(b)

(5)

Page one of three

NAME OF COURT:

FAX NO. (Optional):

E-MAIL ADDRESS (Optional):

Causes of Action (check all that apply):

Jurisdiction (check all that apply):

AMENDED (Number):

ACTION IS AN UNLIMITED CIVIL CASE (exceeds $25,000)It is is not reclassified as unlimited by this cross-complaint

1.

Information about additional cross-complainants who are not competent adults is contained in Cross-Complaint—Attachment 3.

(NUMBER)


Each cross-defendant named above is a natural personexcept cross-defendant (name): except cross-defendant (name):

The true names and capacities of cross-defendants sued as Does are unknown to cross-complainant.

Cross-complainant is required to comply with a claims statute, andhas complied with applicable claims statutes, oris excused from complying because (specify):b.

7. Cause of Action—lndemnification

Cross-defendants were the agents, employees, co-venturers, partners, or in some manner agents or principals, or both, for each other and were acting within the course and scope of their agency or employment.

The principal action alleges, among other things, conduct entitling plaintiff to compensatory damages against me. I contend that I am not liable for events and occurrences described in plaintiff's complaint.

If I am found in some manner responsible to plaintiff or to anyone else as a result of the incidents and occurrences described in plaintiff's complaint, my liability would be based solely upon a derivative form of liability not resulting from my conduct, but only from an obligation imposed upon me by law; therefore, I would be entitled to complete indemnity from each cross-defendant.

Cause of Action—Apportionment of Fault8.

Each cross-defendant was responsible, in whole or in part, for the injuries, if any, suffered by plaintiff.

(Continued on page three)

982.1(14) [Rev. January 1, 2001]

a.

b.

c.

a.

a.

b.

Page two of three

4.a. b.

a business organization, form unknown



other (specify):

(1)a corporation(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

a business organization, form unknown



other (specify):

a corporation

Information about additional cross-defendants who are not natural persons is contained in Cross-Complaint—Attachment 4.

5.

6.


(1)(2)(3)

(4)

(5)

(NUMBER)

If I am judged liable to plaintiff, each cross-defendant should be required: (1) to pay a share of plaintiff's judgment which is in proportion to the comparative negligence of that cross-defendant in causing plaintiff's damages; and (2) to reimburse me for any payments I make to plaintiff in excess of my proportional share of all cross-defendants' negligence.

(TYPE OR PRINT NAME)


Cause of Action—Declaratory Relief9.

An actual controversy exists between the parties concerning their respective rights and duties because cross-complainant contends and cross-defendant disputes as specified in Cross-Complaint—Attachment 9

as follows:

Cause of Action—(specify):10.

CROSS-COMPLAINANT PRAYS for judgment for costs of suit; for such relief as is fair, just, and equitable; and for

compensatory damages

total and complete indemnity for any judgments rendered against me.judgment in a proportionate share from each cross-defendant.a judicial determination that cross-defendants were the legal cause of any injuries and damages sustained by plaintiff and that cross-defendants indemnify me, either completely or partially, for any sums of money which may be recovered against me by plaintiff.

other (specify):

Page three of three

12.

(unlimited civil cases) according to proof.(limited civil cases) in the amount of: $

d.(1)(2)

a.b.c.

e.

(SIGNATURE OF CROSS-COMPLAINANT OR ATTORNEY)

Date:

982.1(14) [Rev. January 1, 2001]


(NUMBER)

(NUMBER)

The following additional causes of action are attached and the statements below apply to each (in each of the attachments, "plaintiff" means "cross-complainant" and "defendant" means "cross-defendant"):

11.

Motor Vehicle

Products LiabilityPremises Liability

General NegligenceIntentional Tort

Other (specify):

a.b.c.d.e.f.

The paragraphs of this cross-complaint alleged on information and belief are as follows (specify paragraph numbers):13.

University of West Los AngelesSchool of Paralegal Studies Course #232Remedies and Enforcement of JudgmentsScott F. Pearce, Esq.Writing Assignment #1

Bloom v. Peterson Properties

This writing assignment is designed to develop your skills at fact gathering and legal reasoning.

Our firm represents a big corporate landlord, Peterson Properties. The company treats its tenantsand employees fairly. We were about to initiate eviction proceedings against a tenant (Ms.Bloom) for violating a “no pets” lease provision, when we received a demand letter from alawyer who represents the tenant. Ms. Bloom alleges that she has been the victim of repeatedincidents of sexual harassment by the resident manager, Mr. Simpson, an employee of our client.

I am giving you two sets of documents. The first is the case file, with all the letters and notesabout the facts as best we know them. The second is a library of statutory and case law thatapplies to the issues presented by this legal dispute. This is a self-contained exercise. You arenot expected to do any outside research. Please rely only on the documents I have provided.

Please write a memo that contains the following ten sections:

1. List the demands made by the tenant’s lawyer.

2. Identify and briefly explain the various interests of our client.

3. What would it cost to simply cave in to the demands of the tenant?

4. Suppose we fight the case to the bitter end and lose. What’s the worst that can happen?

5. List all of the facts you can find about Mr. Simpson, apart from what the tenant alleges.

6. List all of the facts you can find about Ms. Bloom.

7. Obviously we need to investigate the facts. How should we conduct the investigation?

8. Brief the attached cases.

9. Offer specific ideas about how we might structure a negotiated settlement of the case.

10. Draft a brief pre-counseling letter to our client, Mr. Suarez, explaining the situation tohim.

Your completed paper should be no longer than 10 pages. Please be as specific and complete aspossible, and please give me references to the materials as frequently as you can. You don’tneed to create a table of authority, just cite the reference in brackets right in the midst of the text.It might look something like this:

“If we litigate the case and lose, both our client and the lead trial lawyer will beshot in the parking lot of the courthouse. [State v. Reynolds, library page 6]”

“Our client admits the kilo of uncut Peruvian cocaine was in his living room, butmaintains his four-year-old brought it in from the back alley. [Statement ofDefendant, page 2]”

October 12, 2004 is the due date for this assignment. This is Session 7, two weeks after the firstmidterm examination. Our second writing assignment is going to be a more conventionalresearch paper. I will hand it out on October 19 (Session 8) and it will be due on November 30(Session 14).

We will have plenty of opportunity to discuss each of these writing assignments in depth. Ofcourse, you are welcome to communicate with me separately about any questions or thoughtsthat come to mind.

university of west los angeles school of paralegal studies

Documents