Intentional Tort or Fraud Case

Paper Summary:

This paper discusses the facts of the case, "Kathy Lee Queasy v. Keith Quibble and FlimFlam Clunkers, Inc.", in which the plaintiff, Kathy Lee Queasy alleged that the defendants, Keith Quibble and FlimFlam Clunkers, Inc. violated a contract for the sale of a Porsche Super Nova automobile. The paper examines the aspects of tort and fraud within the case and looks at the principle and application of the law in this case.

Table of Contents:
Facts of the Case
Issue
Discussion of the case
Details of the case
Frame of Issue
Rule/ Principle of Law
Application
Conclusion
Recommendations
Summary

From the Paper:

"However, the defendants want to dismiss the case filed against them because of two reasons. The defendants believe that New York Court cannot handle this case since it is not in the jurisdiction of the court to handle such cases of breaching of personal contracts. Secondly, the purchase order sent to the plaintiff by the defendants shows the sign of the plaintiff only. This signifies that the motion passed by the plaintiff should not hold at all, because the defendants' signature is not present on the purchase order."
"If the plaintiff had been careful earlier, before faxing back the purchase order, then there would not have been any need of filing a case against the defendants since then, the plaintiff would have questioned the authenticity of the purchase order sent to him, in the absence of the signature of the selling party."

Sample of Sources Used:

• Reply Memorandum of EFF Defendants. Electronic Frontier Foundation. Retrieved on March 28, 2006 from: http://www.eff.org/legal/cases/Ford_v_GreatDomains/20001101_ford_reply_2.html

More papers on Intentional Tort or Fraud Case:

• Research Paper # 109251 : "The GCHQ Case and Judicial Reviews"
• Case Study # 125677 : "Go Global--Or No?" Case Study"
• Essay # 85410 : "Tort Liability"

APA Citation:

MLA Citation: