Emanuel CrunchTime for Torts, Sixth Edition
This edition has been updated to reflect changes in the law, in casebooks, and topics tested on exams.
Students will benefit from:
- Flowcharts illustrate principles and concepts
- A capsule summary explains the major topics and issues covered in the course
- Exam Tips teach you how to avoid common traps and pitfalls
- Short-answer questions (with answers) provide an opportunity to test your knowledge
- Multiple-choices questions in the style of questions on the Multistate Bar Exam (with detailed answers) build your exam-taking skills and confidence
- Essay questionswith model answers help you review and prepare for exams
- New coverage of the âvalue of a chanceâ issue: Can a medical-malpractice patient recover anything when thereâs a less-than-50/50 chance that non-negligent treatment would have led to a better outcome? [Smith v. Providence Health & Services]
- Expanded discussion of courtsâ refusal to allow plaintiffs to recover for âpure economic loss,â including the California Supreme Court case holding that businesses whose profits were damaged by a toxic gas leak cannot recover anything if they did not also suffer some personal injury or property damage. [Southern California Gas Leak Cases]
- Expanded coverage of the modern approach to the âboth waysâ rule for imputed contributory/comparative negligence, including the courtâs refusal to apply the rule against owner-passengers of a vehicle who are injured due to the combined negligence of a third party and the driver of the ownerâs vehicle. [Seaborne-Worsely v. Mintiens]
- Expanded coverage of the duty to warn in prescription-drug product-liability suits, including whether a plaintiff can recover for inadequate labeling from the maker of the brand-name version of a drug, if the plaintiff actually took a generic version made by some other manufacturer. [T.H. v. Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corp.]
- New coverage of strict product-liability suits arising from Internet sales, including whether a company that merely supplies fulfillment servicesâand never takes title to the goodsâcan nonetheless be liable as a âsellerâ of the goods. [Oberdorf v. Amazon.com Inc.]
This edition has been updated to reflect changes in the law, in casebooks, and topics tested on exams.
Students will benefit from:
- Flowcharts illustrate principles and concepts
- A capsule summary explains the major topics and issues covered in the course
- Exam Tips teach you how to avoid common traps and pitfalls
- Short-answer questions (with answers) provide an opportunity to test your knowledge
- Multiple-choices questions in the style of questions on the Multistate Bar Exam (with detailed answers) build your exam-taking skills and confidence
- Essay questionswith model answers help you review and prepare for exams
- New coverage of the âvalue of a chanceâ issue: Can a medical-malpractice patient recover anything when thereâs a less-than-50/50 chance that non-negligent treatment would have led to a better outcome? [Smith v. Providence Health & Services]
- Expanded discussion of courtsâ refusal to allow plaintiffs to recover for âpure economic loss,â including the California Supreme Court case holding that businesses whose profits were damaged by a toxic gas leak cannot recover anything if they did not also suffer some personal injury or property damage. [Southern California Gas Leak Cases]
- Expanded coverage of the modern approach to the âboth waysâ rule for imputed contributory/comparative negligence, including the courtâs refusal to apply the rule against owner-passengers of a vehicle who are injured due to the combined negligence of a third party and the driver of the ownerâs vehicle. [Seaborne-Worsely v. Mintiens]
- Expanded coverage of the duty to warn in prescription-drug product-liability suits, including whether a plaintiff can recover for inadequate labeling from the maker of the brand-name version of a drug, if the plaintiff actually took a generic version made by some other manufacturer. [T.H. v. Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corp.]
- New coverage of strict product-liability suits arising from Internet sales, including whether a company that merely supplies fulfillment servicesâand never takes title to the goodsâcan nonetheless be liable as a âsellerâ of the goods. [Oberdorf v. Amazon.com Inc.]
Original: $33.99
-65%$33.99
$11.90Description
This edition has been updated to reflect changes in the law, in casebooks, and topics tested on exams.
Students will benefit from:
- Flowcharts illustrate principles and concepts
- A capsule summary explains the major topics and issues covered in the course
- Exam Tips teach you how to avoid common traps and pitfalls
- Short-answer questions (with answers) provide an opportunity to test your knowledge
- Multiple-choices questions in the style of questions on the Multistate Bar Exam (with detailed answers) build your exam-taking skills and confidence
- Essay questionswith model answers help you review and prepare for exams
- New coverage of the âvalue of a chanceâ issue: Can a medical-malpractice patient recover anything when thereâs a less-than-50/50 chance that non-negligent treatment would have led to a better outcome? [Smith v. Providence Health & Services]
- Expanded discussion of courtsâ refusal to allow plaintiffs to recover for âpure economic loss,â including the California Supreme Court case holding that businesses whose profits were damaged by a toxic gas leak cannot recover anything if they did not also suffer some personal injury or property damage. [Southern California Gas Leak Cases]
- Expanded coverage of the modern approach to the âboth waysâ rule for imputed contributory/comparative negligence, including the courtâs refusal to apply the rule against owner-passengers of a vehicle who are injured due to the combined negligence of a third party and the driver of the ownerâs vehicle. [Seaborne-Worsely v. Mintiens]
- Expanded coverage of the duty to warn in prescription-drug product-liability suits, including whether a plaintiff can recover for inadequate labeling from the maker of the brand-name version of a drug, if the plaintiff actually took a generic version made by some other manufacturer. [T.H. v. Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corp.]
- New coverage of strict product-liability suits arising from Internet sales, including whether a company that merely supplies fulfillment servicesâand never takes title to the goodsâcan nonetheless be liable as a âsellerâ of the goods. [Oberdorf v. Amazon.com Inc.]