Philosophy 2080 Lecture Notes - Intentional Tort, Lift Ticket

• School: Western University
• Department: Philosophy
• Course: Philosophy 2080
• Professor: James Hildebrand

Document Summary

If the expert were to give its opinion specifically about the plaintiff, then this opinion would likely determine the outcome of the trial, and the expert is not the. The expert gives opinion evidence, and the judge or jury decides, based on all the evidence, what the facts are. If the expert evidence was too particular, the temptation of the trier of fact is to accept an expert"s account of things and just allow that to determine the outcome of the case. We are usually thinking about the state of mind of the defendant. And even though in negligence law we apply an objective standard i. e. the defendant"s intention to harm is not particularly relevant we are still making that determination about the defendant"s conduct. In reibl v hughes we have to decide what the plaintiff is thinking or should be thinking because it relates to the issue of causation. Appeal"s dismissal of battery as a cause of action.