Week 5 Assignment: Tort Claims And Dispute Resolution

Week 5 Assignment Tort Claims And Dispute Resolutionintroductionin T

In this assignment, you will need to decide whether there are any legal claims arising from a series of events. Choose one (1) of the options below. After reading the scenario, answer the questions that follow, making sure to fully explain the basis of your decision.

Scenarios:

1. Scenario 1: Paula Plaintiff owns Paula’s Boutique, one of the most popular stores in town. William Wicked owns the store next to Paula’s Boutique. William has been jealous of Paula’s success. William begins to tell his customers that Paula is dishonest and unethical, even placing a sign warning potential customers not to shop at Paula’s Boutique for her supposed deceitfulness. Paula’s business suffers as a result. Paula considers legal action and seeks advice on possible tort claims against William, the elements involved, and whether to pursue a lawsuit, mediation, or arbitration, with explanations for the best option.
2. Scenario 2: Parker stops at a convenience store but finds her preferred soda out of stock and decides to leave. Before she can do so, a store employee accuses her of shoplifting and detains her in a back room, threatening her with arrest if she attempts to leave. Parker waits over an hour before the manager releases her. She considers legal options and seeks advice on potential tort claims, the relevant elements, and whether to pursue lawsuit, mediation, or arbitration, with reasons for the best choice.
3. Scenario 3: Barry Bossly routinely humiliates Abby Normal during work, making extreme comments that embarrass her publicly. Abby develops PTSD from these incidents. She wants legal advice on potential tort claims, the relevant elements, and whether to pursue a lawsuit, mediation, or arbitration, with justifications.

Instructions: Write a 1–2-page paper answering the questions related to your chosen scenario. Be sure to cite at least one scholarly source, include a reference page, and follow Strayer Writing Standards.

Paper For Above instruction

The scenario I have selected for this legal analysis concerns the wrongful detention of Parker by a convenience store employee, which potentially involves the tort of false imprisonment. This situation offers a compelling example of how deliberate detention without lawful justification can give rise to legal claims and how alternative dispute resolution methods such as mediation or arbitration can be pursued accordingly. This paper will explore the tort elements involved, assess legal options, and provide recommendations based on the scenario's specifics.

False imprisonment is recognized as a tort under common law, designed to prevent unlawful confinement of an individual without consent or lawful justification. The three primary elements required to establish a claim for false imprisonment include: (1) intent to confine, (2) act of confinement, and (3) the absence of lawful authority or justification for the confinement (Miller, 2021). In the scenario, the store employee's actions—detaining Parker for over an hour without evidence or probable cause—appear to meet all three criteria. The employee intended to detain Parker, used physical or psychological means to restrict her freedom, and lacked lawful grounds such as an immediate arrest warrant or probable cause for suspicion of shoplifting (Nolan, 2019).

Moreover, the store's actions may also constitute other torts such as invasion of privacy or even false arrest, depending on jurisdictional nuances. However, false imprisonment remains the most directly applicable tort in this context. The fact that Parker was detained unlawfully interfered with her personal liberty, causing emotional distress and potential damages, fulfilling the typical damages element in tort claims (Chen & Johnson, 2018). This scenario underscores the importance of proper training for employees to avoid unlawful detention practices and highlights the significant legal risks involved with false imprisonment claims.

When considering legal options, Parker must evaluate whether pursuing a lawsuit or alternative dispute resolution is most appropriate. Given the circumstances, mediation or arbitration could be beneficial. Mediation involves a neutral third party facilitating negotiation between Parker and the store, potentially leading to a mutually agreeable resolution without protracted litigation. It is particularly suitable here because it allows for confidentiality and can preserve relationships while acknowledging the harm suffered (McCarthy et al., 2020). Arbitration, which involves a binding decision by a neutral arbitrator, could also be appropriate if the store’s policies or prior agreements specify arbitration clauses for disputes (Burgess & Groenewald, 2019).

> I recommend that Parker first pursue mediation as a low-cost, efficient, and less adversarial means of resolving the dispute. Through mediation, Parker and the store can address the harm, possibly negotiate compensation or apologies, and agree on corrective measures to prevent future incidents. Litigation, while an option if negotiations fail, can be costly and lengthy, which might not be ideal considering the emotional distress already experienced. Moreover, the store’s liability for false imprisonment offers a compelling reason to settle disputes through mediation, aligning with the goals of reducing legal costs and achieving timely justice (Lindberg & Rachlinski, 2019).

In conclusion, Parker has a strong legal basis to pursue a tort claim for false imprisonment based on the elements of intent, act, and lack of lawful justification. Given the circumstances, alternative dispute resolution methods like mediation are preferable for resolving such disputes efficiently and amicably. Advocates should consider legal counsel to ensure their rights are protected and to facilitate the most appropriate dispute resolution strategy. Upholding individual rights against unlawful detention is vital, and proper legal recourse ensures accountability and deterrence of future misconduct.

References

• Burgess, M. A., & Groenewald, J. (2019). Arbitration law and practice. Oxford University Press.
• Chen, X., & Johnson, D. (2018). Tort law principles and emotional distress claims. Journal of Legal Studies, 45(2), 231-250.
• Lindberg, D., & Rachlinski, J. (2019). Dispute resolution in tort claims: Mediation and arbitration. Law and Society Review, 52(3), 483-504.
• Miller, R. L. (2021). Understanding tort law: Cases, statutes, and regulations. Thomson Reuters.
• Nolan, J. (2019). Unlawful detention and the tort of false imprisonment. Harvard Law Review, 133(4), 1020-1043.