Current Law Event (Case Study Sample)

Name:
Tutor:
Course:
Date:
Introduction
This paper identifies and offers a comprehensive description of a current legal event involving intentional torts. The aspect of intentional tort is also comprehensively reviewed in the paper. The legal event selected is the recent defamation case won by Ryan O’Neal at the appeal court after a long battle. The case involved the claims that Ryan had acquired portraits of Farrah through dubious means.
Analysis
Ryan O’Neal won this defamation case after appealing. The court ruled that Ryan had satisfying evidence to prove that he had been defamed by someone who argued that Ryan had stolen a portrait of Farrah who had died earlier. It was ruled that the famous actor would be able to be paid some damages. The actor, sued in 2011 saying that he had been defamed that he had stolen the portrait created by Andy Warhol. The same painting was the subject of the case between him and the University of Texas. O’Neal’s attorney made it in written form that they were pleased with the ruling. He got more than a million dollars for damages as he explained that the portrait was given to him by Warhol and that he planned to give it to only son (Mccartney 2).
Nevius statement that Ryan had stolen the portrait admitted in a later court hearing that he had no direct evidence toward the plaintiff. Despite him telling a lie, he was not accused as he was constitutionally protected as he was inside the court. This thou simplified the jury’s ruling, as it was obvious Nevius had his own personal reasons for hating Ryan. The two of them have apparently been in court for a very long period.
This case is an explicit example of a defamation case because we find out that Ryan had not stolen the portrait. He had been falsely accused and was required to be compensated for the damages. The embarrassment he had faced as a public figure and the loss of his working contracts is just a few examples of the damages. The plaintiff might have also been injured and had to be compensated.
Tort is a French word which refers to a mistake. It is defined as a defiance of an obligation imposed by the civil law. When someone injures a person by violating some of those duties, it is said to be a tort. The injury could refer to an individual or even her property. For example, if a newspaper publishes something about someone that is false, that is tort. If a doctor fails to attend to a patient and then dies or his condition gets worse, the doctor commits a tort called negligence.
Tort is broad as it contains several categories, and it is different from contract law and criminal law. Stealing a car and selling illegal drugs such as cocaine are examples of crimes. This is because the society considers the acts as a threat to the government, and prosecution is done to the wrongdoer whether the victim wants the case to go forward or not. It is the injured party that seeks to be compensated in a tort case. She finds herself a lawyer to represent her, and the lawyer must be in a position to convince the court for the payment of damages to the plaintiff. The injured does not have the mandate to send the defendant behind bars. This is because his actions may be both a tort and a crime. Con artists also are also categorized in the tort of fraud. If they are found guilty, they are made to compensate the injured party. The state can also imprison him on top of that for committing the crime of fraud.
A contract row is also different from a tort case. In a contract case, there is usually an agreement between two people or people, and this creates responsibility for both parties. The suit is also made by the plaintiff, and if he wins the case, the damages get refunded with money. In a tort, there are no agreements but the suit is placed by the plaintiff and the damages paid with money. The criminal law is very different as the government does the prosecution and the punishments are harsh because they may include imprisonment, being fined or both.
One of the categories of tort is the intentional torts. This is harm done on someone or something deliberately. A false or untrue statement that harms the reputation of someone is called defamation. They can either be oral or written and when written they are said to be libel while slander is oral defamation. If for instance, a certain store is accused by a newspaper of overcharging its customers and that is not true, it is libel. A teacher who accuses a student wrongly in class of maybe stealing, it is taken as slander (Shuy 28).
A defamation case has four elements. An element is referred to as a truth that the injured party presents in order to win a suit. This is also done by any plaintiff in any other kind of lawsuit. The defamation elements are falseness, defamation statement, communicated and inquiry. Defamation statements are terms that can damage another person’s reputation. When a teacher accuses a student of drug dealing, it automatically harms his reputation. In falseness, the words should be force such that if the student deals with drugs, the teacher has an argument to slander. While communicating, the statements must be directed to another person apart from the plaintiff. During the inquiry, the plaintiff must have evidence of some injury. In libel cases, the law does not necessarily need evidence of an injury because it is written making it permanent.
Opinion in a defamation case is usually compelling as it is hard to know the truth. For instance, if someone says that Joseph does not help out like other rich people, he cannot be found guilty. This is because it is his opinion and does not suggest any names. When it becomes possible for television and radio to have defamation, it is considered libel because of the enormous audience. This means that a plaintiff does not have to show damages in broadcasting cases.
The rules are different for celebrities or people who play in the public. A police chief is an example of a public official while a public figure may be a movie star or musicians who are constantly in the limelight. A public figure can only do well in case if he presents the real spite by the defendant. If the plaintiff is unable to provide proof, he loses the case just like everyone else.
In most cases of online defamation, the plaintiff ends up losing the case. For example, Kenneth, a businessman woke up one morning to constant phone calls threatening him because of a bulletin board advertisement. He had wrongly been associated with having public offensive slogans on a bombing that had claimed many innocent lives. He did not know anything about this, so he sued the advertisers for defamation, but he lost the case (Adibe 24).
When it is important for defendants to speak freely, they get added protection on defamation cases. These privileges happen in courts and lawmaking hearings. Witnesses speaking there can say anything and not be accused of defamation. This is referred to as absolute privilege. Qualified privilege happens when two parties or people have a need to exchange information. A witness who tells lies is only guilty of perjury not slander (Emanuel 68)
Intentional restrain of a person without concrete evidence and with no consent is referred to as false imprisonment. Most of the false imprisonments come from vending stores where employees find themselves detained falsely because of suspected theft. The laws these days are clear that no one should be detained without enough evidence. However for an employee to be detained in an employer’s office answering questions is viewed as legal (Kubasek et al 38).
If a defendant says something that hurts the plaintiff emotionally, most courts give the injured t...