Two Guns, One Face (Summers v Tice)
Download MP3Jeremy Harlin, Lauren Michaels, and Pia Smith join Billy DeClercq to pull apart the classic tort law case in which a hunting accident left the victim which of the other hunters was the one who shot him (accidentally, we presume).
Check out Billy on the Web: www.comedy.lawyer
See You're on Mute - LIVE (" The Greatest Sketch Group of All Time" featuring Billy DeClercq, JoAnna Senatore, Griffin Taylor, & Toni Senatore, with special guests) every 1st Saturday night every month at 10:00 pm at the Pack Theater in Hollywood.... live sketch and improv comedy birthed from Second City classes by four exemplary students, molded by the pressures of Zoom shows during the pandemic and now before you perfected for live performance.
Tickets:
https://www.eventbrite.com/e/youre-on-mute-tickets-455231950017
See You're on Mute - LIVE (" The Greatest Sketch Group of All Time" featuring Billy DeClercq, JoAnna Senatore, Griffin Taylor, & Toni Senatore, with special guests) every 1st Saturday night every month at 10:00 pm at the Pack Theater in Hollywood.... live sketch and improv comedy birthed from Second City classes by four exemplary students, molded by the pressures of Zoom shows during the pandemic and now before you perfected for live performance.
Tickets:
https://www.eventbrite.com/e/youre-on-mute-tickets-455231950017
Summers v. Tice (Nov. 17, 1948) 33 Cal. 2d 80
Facts: Charles Summers was a guide on on a hunting trip with two defendants, Tice and Simonsen. Summers explained to safely fire their weapons. A quail flew, two guns went off, and Summers was shot twice - in his right eye and lip -- with bird shot discharged from a shotgun. Both defendants had identical guns and both guns went off, and nobody knew which defendant actually shot Summers.
In trial court, there was a judgment against both defendants. Two pellets had caused the injuries to plaintiff's lip and eye, an both might have been discharged from a single weapon (defendant) or each defendant may have contributed one of the injuring pellets. The defendants were both found negligent, and that the plaintiff was not at fault. Defendants appealed, claiming they are not jointly and severally liable, as they were not acting in concert, and that there is not sufficient evidence to show which defendant was guilty of the negligence which caused the injuries -- the shot fired by Tice and/or the shot fired by Simonson.
Holding: Both defendants are liable as joint tortfeasors, because it could not be determined which was responsible. The reason for the rule is that it unfair to deny the injured person recovery simply because he cannot prove how much damage each did, when it is certain that between them they did all the damage.
Reasoning: "When two or more persons by their acts are possibly the sole cause of a harm, or when two or more acts of the same person are possibly the sole cause, and the plaintiff has introduced evidence that the one of the two persons, or the one of the same person's two acts, is culpable, then the defendant has the burden of proving that the other person, or his other act, was the sole cause of the harm." (citing Wigmore)
Lauren, Jeremy, and Pia explore the comedic implications of this Cheney-esque fact pattern. According to Jeremy, it happens more often than you think!
Shout out to non-profit California Lawyers for the Arts www.calawyersforthearts.org Serving the creative arts and innovation community since 1974! California Lawyers for the Arts [CLA] is a non-profit organization founded in 1974 to provide legal services to artists and members of the creative arts community. In 1987, Bay Area Lawyers for the Arts [BALA] joined forces with Volunteer Lawyers for the Arts-Los Angeles [VLA] to form California Lawyers for the Arts as a statewide organization. CLA is part of an informal network of “Volunteer Lawyers for the Arts” programs that serve artists through state-based organizations throughout the United States. CLA is a multi-faceted arts service organization that provides legal support, alternative dispute resolution services, educational programs and advocacy for the arts and justice reform.
Thank you to our guests:
Facts: Charles Summers was a guide on on a hunting trip with two defendants, Tice and Simonsen. Summers explained to safely fire their weapons. A quail flew, two guns went off, and Summers was shot twice - in his right eye and lip -- with bird shot discharged from a shotgun. Both defendants had identical guns and both guns went off, and nobody knew which defendant actually shot Summers.
In trial court, there was a judgment against both defendants. Two pellets had caused the injuries to plaintiff's lip and eye, an both might have been discharged from a single weapon (defendant) or each defendant may have contributed one of the injuring pellets. The defendants were both found negligent, and that the plaintiff was not at fault. Defendants appealed, claiming they are not jointly and severally liable, as they were not acting in concert, and that there is not sufficient evidence to show which defendant was guilty of the negligence which caused the injuries -- the shot fired by Tice and/or the shot fired by Simonson.
Holding: Both defendants are liable as joint tortfeasors, because it could not be determined which was responsible. The reason for the rule is that it unfair to deny the injured person recovery simply because he cannot prove how much damage each did, when it is certain that between them they did all the damage.
Reasoning: "When two or more persons by their acts are possibly the sole cause of a harm, or when two or more acts of the same person are possibly the sole cause, and the plaintiff has introduced evidence that the one of the two persons, or the one of the same person's two acts, is culpable, then the defendant has the burden of proving that the other person, or his other act, was the sole cause of the harm." (citing Wigmore)
Lauren, Jeremy, and Pia explore the comedic implications of this Cheney-esque fact pattern. According to Jeremy, it happens more often than you think!
Shout out to non-profit California Lawyers for the Arts www.calawyersforthearts.org Serving the creative arts and innovation community since 1974! California Lawyers for the Arts [CLA] is a non-profit organization founded in 1974 to provide legal services to artists and members of the creative arts community. In 1987, Bay Area Lawyers for the Arts [BALA] joined forces with Volunteer Lawyers for the Arts-Los Angeles [VLA] to form California Lawyers for the Arts as a statewide organization. CLA is part of an informal network of “Volunteer Lawyers for the Arts” programs that serve artists through state-based organizations throughout the United States. CLA is a multi-faceted arts service organization that provides legal support, alternative dispute resolution services, educational programs and advocacy for the arts and justice reform.
Thank you to our guests:
- Lauren Michaels @sweetrelishfilms
- Jeremy Harlin @king_jeremyharlin
- Pia Smith @piaminskystyle
LAYING DOWN THE LAW is created by Beyond UNreasonable Doubt and produced by Feightner Productions (fytepro.com). Theme music by David Felton. Cover Art by Q (@TheMightyQWorks). Follow Billy DeClercq on Twitter: @MaxHeadroomEsq
Want to hire Billy as your lawyer, or as a comedian? Go to https://declercq.law/
If you’re ready to make a podcast, make your podcast better or collaborate in another way, contact us at makemypod@fytepro.com
Creators and Guests
Host
Billy Declercq
NEW: @comedylawyer@mastodon.lol AKA @ComedyLawyerHost of LAYING DOWN THE LAW podcasthttps://t.co/ulxHFSPuA5
