Sam is drunk and asked to leave a Hotel by the owner. He then goes around to the back of the Hotel and climbs a fence and tries to enter the private residence at the back of the Hotel. The owner hears him, and frightened for his family beats Sam over the head with a heavy piece of wood. Sam is badly injured and goes to hospital where his mother sees him and suffers serious shock. Both Sam & his mother sue the owner of the Hotel for compensation
2006-08-24 13:06:15 · 7 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
Depends on the state. A person is permitted to use force, but not excessive force, to defend himself and his family from attack in all states. The owner of a property is allowed to defend his property with force in some states.
Sam's mother has no case against the owner for compensation. In claims like this she would have had to witness the actual beating to be able to be compensated for her "shock."
2006-08-24 13:16:12 · answer #1 · answered by Catspaw 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Ok I am responding to the message you left me. Tell me your email and I'll send you a copy of it, if theres a mistake please tell me, because sometimes I miss errors I might make. My email is mandy_rules_you@yahoo.com :] Thanks
Answer to your question: Sam shouldn't have been snooping around in the first place. The owner can get him for trespassing on private property. Also the owner was defending himself and the family, but I think he might have to pay for the medical bill.
2006-08-24 20:16:50 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
hmmm...I think Sam is mostly at fault, although there could be an arguement made that the homeowner used excessive force. The hotel owner is not at fault.
2006-08-24 20:13:36 · answer #3 · answered by Crys H. 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Hotel Dude should've called the Federales. He's still in the wrong. He wasn't attacked. He laid in wait. He brained the guy. Even though he probably had it coming. The Federales would've done it for nothing and gotten away with it.
2006-08-24 20:08:54 · answer #4 · answered by vanamont7 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
He shouldnt of came back, the owner was just defending himself and his property.
2006-08-24 20:10:58 · answer #5 · answered by lurky77 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
owner had right to do that.
he told him to leave and the guy tries to break in trough the back
and was therefor treated as a burgular.
2006-08-24 20:30:31 · answer #6 · answered by sikn_shadow_420 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
typical american case lets sue for everything----the mother has no case whatsoever- and it depends on whose side u are on----
2006-08-24 20:13:33 · answer #7 · answered by fringefan1 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋