Good Essay On Robert Jones Attorney

Dan Davis Accountant

Issue arises as to whether the Attorney asking about Dan having an affair on his wife was proper for purposes of the deposition. There is greater lieu way on what questions may be asked in a deposition than in an actual trial. However the result of answering questions that may seem irrelevant must be evidence that is admissible at trial. The question asked by Robert Jones is personal and meant to embarrass Dan Davis and has no relevance whatsoever to the case for purposes of the deposition or the trial if one resulted.
The second issue is whether punching Dan on the jaw amounted to tortuous assault and if so was it simple or aggravated? When assault is simple, it involves a minor injury or a mere threat to violence. It may include shoving or smacking across the face. Aggravated assault on the other hand involves among other things injury that would require that the person so assaulted be hospitalized. A broken jaw would definitely require hospitalization or at least specialized medical treatment. The nature of assault here qualifies as an intentional tort since which is distinguished from a negligent tort. This is because there was intent on Jones’ part as he struck Dan. Here the wrong although civil assumes some criminal wrong features as the element of intent has to be established in addition to the actual act of punching.
Another legal issue is whether the disclosure to the Attorney’s colleague about Dan was a violation of privileged information. It may be argued that the statement that Dan was incompetent and exploited his clients is information that never came up during the deposition and therefore would not qualify as privileged information. Ideally it should have emerged during the deposition that Dan was indeed incompetent and exploitative of his clients.
Finally, issue arises as to whether defamation (slander or libel) resulted when Jones makes a statement to a colleague that Dan is an incompetent and exploitative accountant. If the statement was oral, false and injured Dan with respect to his profession business or trade then it qualifies as slander. If it was written, typed or printed then the statement would comprise libel. The defamatory statement has to be communicated to someone other than the party complaining and this was the case here. As regards damages, Dan is entitled, if he demonstrates it in court, to receive payment for losing earnings, his capacity to earn which have occurred or will occur in the future due to the defamation. He may also be entitled to general damages for pain and suffering which includes but is not limited to mental anguish, emotional distress and so forth.