Officer Jones V. Henderson Case Summary

Words: 422
Pages: 2

The two officers committed a tort against Ames when they demanded Ames to get inside their car and transported him to nowhere. Tort against persons is intentional acts that harm an individual’s physical or mental integrity (Kubasek 187). In this case, Officers Jones and Henderson cause emotional distress to Ames, although he complies with the officer’s demand Ames was reluctant to comply. Even though Ames has a history of being alcoholic and being dependent to illegal drugs, he did not commit any crime during the incident where he was sleeping on a park bench. In addition, it was mentioned in the case that Woodland community has no law against vagrancy or homelessness. Therefore, Officers Jones and Henderson act unethically when they went over their authority of removing Ames on Woodlawn downtown area. They even leave him in a place where he might be in trouble or could cause harm to Ames. Woodlawn should consider the implementation of a law against vagrancy or homelessness to reduce the number of homeless people in their area. They can create an organization that would focus on helping the …show more content…
Both Streater and Hunt have violated the law, Streater for diving over the speed limit and for not wearing a seatbelt and Hunt for violating the speed limit, drunk driving and not wearing his corrective glasses. Per legal principle, (1) the plaintiff’s conduct fell below the standard of care to prevent unreasonable risk of harm and (2) the plaintiff’s failure was a contributing cause of the plaintiff’s injury, the defendant will not be liable for the plaintiff’s injury unless the plaintiff can prove that the defendant had a last opportunity to avoid the accident (Kubasek 226). In this case, Hunts doesn’t have the last opportunity to avoid the accident because he was looking at his passenger seat to find the map. In addition, Streater was not wearing his seatbelt during the incident that contributed to his