Were any constitutional rights violated in this case? If so which

Were any constitutional rights violated in this case? If so, which ones.

As shown in the case study, there was one constitutional right that was violated in this case. Betty's rights were violated because of the actions of the police officers. The police officers violated the fourth amendment by searching in Betty's office without a search warrant. The fourth amendment is part of the constitution and states that it prohibits unreasonable searches and seizures. The police officers should have attained a search warrant before entering the premises.

Explore the tort theories of assault, battery, and trespass and discuss how they apply in this case.

Assault- An assault occurs when one person places another in fear or apprehension of an immediate, offensive bodily contact (Kubasek, P.198).

This tort applies in this case because of Betty's student informant, Snitch, was involved. Snitch hit Betty in the head with a rock he threw to break a window which resulted in him committing assault. Snitch was trying to save Dr.

Get quality help now

RhizMan

Verified writer

Proficient in: Assault

4.9 (247)

“ Rhizman is absolutely amazing at what he does . I highly recommend him if you need an assignment done ”

+84 relevant experts are online

Hire writer

Pickles but accidentally hit Betty in the head. Snitch still committed assault because he placed fear another in fear or apprehension of an immediate, offensive bodily contact into Veronica.

Battery- An intentional, unwanted, offensive bodily contact (Kubasek, P.198).

The battery tort is not applied to this case study. Snitch did not commit battery because he was only trying to save Mr. Pickles. He unintentional hit Betty with the rock while breaking the window. If he were to intentionally hit Betty with the rock, he would have committed battery.

Trespass to Personalty- Temporarily exerting control over another's personal property or interfering with the owner's right to use it (Kubasek, P. 211).

The trespass to Personalty tort could apply to this case study if Betty did not own the off-campus newspaper office. If the university owned the office, Betty would have temporarily exerted control over personal property or interfering with the owner's right to use it. Betty swallowed the key in order for Mr. Pickles to not attain the key to escape.

Who should be held liable for damages and what damages might be available to the plaintiff?

The manufacturer of medication that Veronica was given, Medi-Made Incorporated, should be held liable for damages. The medication did not list all the side effects when taking the medication. Veronica should be able to qualify for compensatory damages because of the migraine affected by the medication. Veronica would receive all the damages including any medical assistance or more medication to help her recurring migraines.

If you were in charge of manufacturing Veronica's medication, would you consider it your ethical obligation to list all potential illnesses that may result from your product? Discuss why or why not.

If I was in charge of manufacturing Veronica's medication, I would consider it my ethical obligation to list all potential illnesses that may result in my product. I would want to list out all the potential illnesses that may result when taking the product because I would want to follow the idea of social responsibility of business. The social responsibility of business consists of the expectation that the community imposes (Kubasek, P. 18). For my business, I would want to be truthful to my customers and by not listing the potential illness for every product, that is untruthful.

Should Veronica be forced to settle her claim through arbitration? Discuss why or why not.

In my personal opinion, Veronica should be forced to settle her claim through arbitration because on the pill bottle there was a disclaimer. Veronica used the product without reading, resulting to be in an implied-in-fact contract. Veronica was given medicine from Medi-Made to use but could have rejected it. It is Veronica's fault to continue using the product. Veronica knew that side effects could arise but did know migraines could be one of the side effects. In conclusion, Veronica continued taking the medication and did not switch to another medication, therefore she will have to go through arbitration which Medi-Made implied.

Presume that Veronica does not want to enter into arbitration with Medi-Made. What other forms of alternative dispute resolution might be available to her?

If Veronica chooses not to go through arbitration with Medi-Made, she can go through other forms of alternative dispute resolutions. Negotiation and mediation are forms of alternative dispute resolutions that Veronica can choose from.