Law Help - Supreme Court Case
05-10-2008, 12:30 AM
#1
Contributors
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: So Cal, USA
Posts: 14,776
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My Ride: 545iSMGSilver GrayAuburn Dakota LeatherLogic 7 Premium SoundSports Package
Can any lawyers help me out?
Next Tues a partner and I are suppose argue a case in front of the class against another couple. We're suppose to be the representing attorneys and the class is the supreme court.
The case assigned to us is Ryan v. New York Central RR 35 N.Y. 210. Here's a link to an opinion against me! I haven't found one that helps me.
http://www.audiocasefiles.com/cases/detail/case/9058/
I'm the Plaintiff's (Ryan's) Attorney
OVERVIEW: The railroad negligently caused a fire that destroyed its woodshed. The fire spread to the landowner's property 130 feet away from the shed and destroyed a building. He sued the railroad to recover for the damage to the building. The court affirmed the decision to nonsuit the landowner. The court held that a person was liable in damages for the proximate results of his own acts, but not for remote damages. Under the circumstances of the case the court held that the landowner's damages were the remote result of the negligence of the railroad. The immediate result was the destruction of the railroads' own wood and sheds; beyond that, it was remote. The court held that destruction of the landowner's building 130 feet away from the source of a fire was not the ordinary and natural result of a fire.
If you read the case it says it has gone through the appellate court and the Court of Appeals of New York and both ruled against Ryan... so now it's theoretically going up to the supreme court.
I found a lot of information on why the Defendant should NOT be responsible for the Plaintiff's house... pretty much because the damages are not immediate as in the woodshed but "remote."
So basically the issue is: Is the owner of a burning building liable to the owners of adjacent buildings?
My goal is to win for the client... Two courts have struck it down already...
I've thought of some stuff but have no answer for. I figured based on what I found the defendant will ask questions like if its in the city and lots houses burn down originating from house A how many houses should the defendant be responsible for? Wind Carries fire and there are other varying circumstances... thats cannot be controlled so the defendant can't be responsible for that. These fires are of negligence not intentional.
So any attorney's out there that can help me out? what can I use to argue this case?
Next Tues a partner and I are suppose argue a case in front of the class against another couple. We're suppose to be the representing attorneys and the class is the supreme court.
The case assigned to us is Ryan v. New York Central RR 35 N.Y. 210. Here's a link to an opinion against me! I haven't found one that helps me.
http://www.audiocasefiles.com/cases/detail/case/9058/
I'm the Plaintiff's (Ryan's) Attorney
OVERVIEW: The railroad negligently caused a fire that destroyed its woodshed. The fire spread to the landowner's property 130 feet away from the shed and destroyed a building. He sued the railroad to recover for the damage to the building. The court affirmed the decision to nonsuit the landowner. The court held that a person was liable in damages for the proximate results of his own acts, but not for remote damages. Under the circumstances of the case the court held that the landowner's damages were the remote result of the negligence of the railroad. The immediate result was the destruction of the railroads' own wood and sheds; beyond that, it was remote. The court held that destruction of the landowner's building 130 feet away from the source of a fire was not the ordinary and natural result of a fire.
If you read the case it says it has gone through the appellate court and the Court of Appeals of New York and both ruled against Ryan... so now it's theoretically going up to the supreme court.
I found a lot of information on why the Defendant should NOT be responsible for the Plaintiff's house... pretty much because the damages are not immediate as in the woodshed but "remote."
So basically the issue is: Is the owner of a burning building liable to the owners of adjacent buildings?
My goal is to win for the client... Two courts have struck it down already...
I've thought of some stuff but have no answer for. I figured based on what I found the defendant will ask questions like if its in the city and lots houses burn down originating from house A how many houses should the defendant be responsible for? Wind Carries fire and there are other varying circumstances... thats cannot be controlled so the defendant can't be responsible for that. These fires are of negligence not intentional.
So any attorney's out there that can help me out? what can I use to argue this case?
05-10-2008, 10:21 AM
#3
Contributors
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Thousand Oaks, California
Posts: 11,084
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My Ride: 2008 550i Jet Black on Black Leather, SAT with Paddles, Logic 7, Comfort Seats, NAV, Sport Package, PDC, Xenons, Sirius, Trinity 12W LED Angel Eyes, RPi GT Exhaust, M rear spoiler, ACS Roof Spoiler, Tinted Tail Lights, Bimmian Carbon Fiber Pillar Trim, Bimmian Shadow 550i emblem, RPi Scoop, E60 Forum Cling, Mtec bulbs in fog lights, Mtec 2W LED for License Plate Light Bulbs, K&N Filter, Bimmian LED Smoked Side Markers, Blackout roundels, Carbon Fiber Kidney Grills.
Retired Rides - 1989 325i convertible, 1995 M3, 2002 X5, 2005 545i, 2008 X5 (Lemon)
Originally Posted by sixcard' post='577702' date='May 10 2008, 03:43 AM
f-puck, have at it! 
Though on the surface, it DOES seem as though NY RR SHOULD be responsible for the damages to Ryan's house as he certainly did NOTHING to cause the damage himself! 
As a layman, thats how I see it! Good Luck EBMCS03!! Give 'em hell!! 
05-10-2008, 12:43 PM
#4
Contributors
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: White Plains, NY
Posts: 688
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My Ride: 2008 550, Carbon Black Metallic, Natural Brown Dakota Leather, Sport Package, Sport Automatic Transmission, Cold Weather Package, Power Rear and Manual Side Sun Shades, etc.
Retired - 2004 545 SMG, Black Sapphire Metallic, Auburn Dakota Leather, Cold Weather and Sports Packages, Power Rear and Manual Side Sun Shades
Law student? Did you Sheppardize Ryan? There are numerous cases questioning and criticizing its holding. Try:
Martin v. New York, O. & W. R. Co., 16 N.Y.S. 499
Nary v. New York, O. & W. R. Co., 9 N.Y.S. 153
Martin v. New York, O. & W. R. Co., 16 N.Y.S. 499
Nary v. New York, O. & W. R. Co., 9 N.Y.S. 153
05-10-2008, 12:49 PM
#5
Contributors
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: So Cal, USA
Posts: 14,776
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My Ride: 545iSMGSilver GrayAuburn Dakota LeatherLogic 7 Premium SoundSports Package
Originally Posted by robg' post='577902' date='May 10 2008, 01:43 PM
Law student? Did you Sheppardize Ryan? There are numerous cases questioning and criticizing its holding. Try:
Martin v. New York, O. & W. R. Co., 16 N.Y.S. 499
Nary v. New York, O. & W. R. Co., 9 N.Y.S. 153
Martin v. New York, O. & W. R. Co., 16 N.Y.S. 499
Nary v. New York, O. & W. R. Co., 9 N.Y.S. 153
Ooo thanks. I'll go read up on those...
NO I'm not a law student... I'm a Engineer by trade... have a B.S. in electrical engineering work in aerospace but I'm doing my MBA and one of the required class is Business Law.
So two weeks into the class and we get this kind of assignment... So I figured maybe some people here who know more about laws can throw me some help.
05-10-2008, 12:52 PM
#6
Contributors
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: So Cal, USA
Posts: 14,776
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My Ride: 545iSMGSilver GrayAuburn Dakota LeatherLogic 7 Premium SoundSports Package
Originally Posted by flyingpuck' post='577860' date='May 10 2008, 11:21 AM
Though on the surface, it DOES seem as though NY RR SHOULD be responsible for the damages to Ryan's house as he certainly did NOTHING to cause the damage himself!
05-10-2008, 01:01 PM
#7
Contributors
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: White Plains, NY
Posts: 688
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My Ride: 2008 550, Carbon Black Metallic, Natural Brown Dakota Leather, Sport Package, Sport Automatic Transmission, Cold Weather Package, Power Rear and Manual Side Sun Shades, etc.
Retired - 2004 545 SMG, Black Sapphire Metallic, Auburn Dakota Leather, Cold Weather and Sports Packages, Power Rear and Manual Side Sun Shades
Originally Posted by EBMCS03' post='577906' date='May 10 2008, 04:49 PM
Ooo thanks. I'll go read up on those...
NO I'm not a law student... I'm a Engineer by trade... have a B.S. in electrical engineering work in aerospace but I'm doing my MBA and one of the required class is Business Law. So two weeks into the class and we get this kind of assignment...
So I figured maybe some people here who know more about laws can throw me some help.
NO I'm not a law student... I'm a Engineer by trade... have a B.S. in electrical engineering work in aerospace but I'm doing my MBA and one of the required class is Business Law.
So two weeks into the class and we get this kind of assignment... So I figured maybe some people here who know more about laws can throw me some help.
If you cannot find them, send me a message with your email and I can send them to you.
05-10-2008, 01:29 PM
#8
Senior Members
Originally Posted by EBMCS03' post='577671' date='May 10 2008, 09:30 AM
So basically the issue is: Is the owner of a burning building liable to the owners of adjacent buildings?
Here yes, except if he proves there was a defect of construction or if he proves he made the ordinary maintenance .
And imho it would be the same in France and Germany because the civil law is similar .
05-10-2008, 03:22 PM
#9
Contributors
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Thousand Oaks, California
Posts: 11,084
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My Ride: 2008 550i Jet Black on Black Leather, SAT with Paddles, Logic 7, Comfort Seats, NAV, Sport Package, PDC, Xenons, Sirius, Trinity 12W LED Angel Eyes, RPi GT Exhaust, M rear spoiler, ACS Roof Spoiler, Tinted Tail Lights, Bimmian Carbon Fiber Pillar Trim, Bimmian Shadow 550i emblem, RPi Scoop, E60 Forum Cling, Mtec bulbs in fog lights, Mtec 2W LED for License Plate Light Bulbs, K&N Filter, Bimmian LED Smoked Side Markers, Blackout roundels, Carbon Fiber Kidney Grills.
Retired Rides - 1989 325i convertible, 1995 M3, 2002 X5, 2005 545i, 2008 X5 (Lemon)
Originally Posted by EBMCS03' post='577908' date='May 10 2008, 01:52 PM
Ya You tell me... but the law said otherwise... thats why the "appeal" to the supreme court. Kinda like if during a rainstorm your well maintain tree limb falls on top of a neighbors car... you're not responsible because its natural accident... I guess they call fire natural...
What like spontaneous combustion???? 
You gotta be kidding me! 
Fire is indeed a natural element, but the cause has to be otherwise! 
05-10-2008, 03:25 PM
#10
Contributors
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: So Cal, USA
Posts: 14,776
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My Ride: 545iSMGSilver GrayAuburn Dakota LeatherLogic 7 Premium SoundSports Package
Thanks robg for the tip on Lexis! here's a preview to others thats been following this. There's a search feature that returns a list of every other case that has every cited Ryan.
Now I got more info to work with... anyone that can think of little things like this please pass it on.
Now I got more info to work with... anyone that can think of little things like this please pass it on.
