Need Help With This Assignment?

Let Our Team of Professional Writers Write a PLAGIARISM-FREE Paper for You!

SUBMIT YOUR ASSIGNMENT

Law, Coursework, LAW204 – Business Law I

Briefing a Case

Briefing a Case

Do you need any help for completing your assignment ? Contact us at eminencepapers.com. We endeavor to provide you with excellent service.

Olympic Airways v. Husain Case Brief
Who are the parties to the case? Olympic Airways is the petitioner.

Rubina Husain, Individually and as Personal Representative of

Abid M. Hanson, Deceased, et al. as the respondent.
What is the citation of the case? 540 U.S. 644 (2004)
What are the basic facts of the case? Dr. Abid Hanson and Rubina Husain, his wife, traveled with his children and another family in December 1997 from San Francisco to Cairo and Athens for a family holiday. The family stopped in New York, where Dr. Hanson discovered that Olympic Airways allowed international flight passengers to smoke. He requested a non-smoking seat because of his history of sensitivity to secondhand smoke and persistent anaphylactic reactions. The sensitivity had lasted for more than 20 years before his death. He also suffered from asthma and was not receiving regular medical care. He, however, regularly used and carried a Proventil inhaler to help him breathe. He had begun to use the inhaler frequently due to his age.

The flight attendant, Maria Leptourgou, refused to move the family to the unoccupied seats in the non-smoking sections. Two hours after leaving New York, travelers in the smoking segment started smoking, and the smoke surrounded Dr. Hanson, who reacted to the smoke and began asking for another inhaler since the inhaler he was initially using was already empty. He then made his way to the plane’s front in search of fresh air. He leaned on a chair next to the galley section and gestured for his wife to pass over his emergency kit; the wife got with the emergency kit and injected him with epinephrine before waking Dr. Umesh Sabharwal, an allergy expert who was part of the passengers. The doctor administered another shot of epinephrine to Dr. Hanson and started administering oxygen and CPR. Dr. Hanson then died afterward.

During the flight, Dr. Hanson asked for a meal, but he did not eat much. He had also shared the meal with his daughter and one of the passengers on the plane. However, he was allergic to many foods, such as tomatoes, grapes, and yeast, although the extent of his allergies was unclear, and he had been eating foods with tomatoes without an allergic reaction. An autopsy was not conducted to establish the immediate cause of the death due to the family’s religious beliefs. In the district court, the Plaintiffs contended that Dr. Hanson’s death was a result of a serious asthma attack resulting from breathing in secondhand smoke. Defendants argued that the death was due to an allergic response to food or another medical issue not related to smoke. The district court established that being exposed to smoke during the flight was the main cause of Dr. Hanson’s death.
What Dr. Hanson’s estate argue? The refusal to help Dr. Hanson was the necessary injury resulting in an event.

The flight attendant was negligent for failing to do anything to handle a recognized risk associated with the passenger’s health problem.

 
What did Olympic Air argue? ·       Dr. Hanson died due to an asthma attack in a then-normal aircraft operation, which involved smoking cigarettes. Olympic Air also argued that the failure of the flight attendant to move him to another seat was inaction, whereas only action could result in a happening or event.

·       Olympic Air had no duty to move Dr. Hanson.

·       There was no evidence that Dr. Hanson would have survived if the flight attendant found him a different seat.

 
What did the court decide? Dr. Hanson’s death was an accident, as described by the district court and convention.
Did the court apply statutory law, case law or both in reaching its decision? In reaching the decision in this case, the court applied the Warsaw Convention case law.

References

FindLaw. (2021). HUSAIN v. OLYMPIC AIRWAYS. FindLaw. Retrieved 30 June 2021, from https://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-9th-circuit/1262812.html.

Olympic Airways v. Husain. (n.d.). Oyez. Retrieved June 30, 2021, from https://www.oyez.org/cases/2003/02-1348

ORDER A PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPER HERE

We’ll write everything from scratch

Question 

Briefing a Case

Due Date: 11:59 p.m. EST, Sunday of Unit 1

Briefing a Case

Briefing a Case

Points: 100

Overview:

 

In litigation, lawyers need to rely on case law to support the outcome they are asking the court take. Lawyers will often “brief” a case to obtain a better understanding of the case. In other words, lawyers will use a specific format to outline the most important points in a court’s decision. This activity will also assist you in understanding the cases discussed in this class.

Instructions:

  • Listen to the oral arguments in the Olympic Airways v. Husain Read about the case.
  • Read about how to brief a
  • Using the template provided, complete a “brief” about the case, including the following:
    • Who are the parties to the case?
    • What is the citation of the case?
    • What are the basic facts of the case?
    • What did Dr. Hanson’s estate argue?
    • What did Olympic Air argue?
    • What did the court decide?
    • Did the court apply statutory law, case law or both in reaching its decision?

Requirements:

  • Use APA format for non-legal sources such as the textbook. Use Bluebook citation format for any legal
    • Include the resource to the case and oral
    • You do not need to use any sources other than your text and the audio recording of the oral arguments.
  • Submit a Word document using the case brief
  • Maximum two pages in length, excluding the Reference

Be sure to read the criteria below by which your work will be evaluated before you write and again after you write.

Evaluation Rubric for Briefing a Case Assignment

CRITERIA Deficient Needs Improvement Proficient Exemplary
0 – 44 Points 45 – 59 Points 60 – 74

Points

 75 Points
Case Brief Does not concisely and clearly answer questions about the case. Case brief is not succinct. Somewhat concisely and clearly answers some questions about the case. Case brief is not overly succinct. Mostly concisely, succinctly, and clearly answers all questions about the case. Concisely, succinctly, and clearly answers all questions about the case.
0 – 5 points 6 – 7 points 8 – 9 points 10 points
Paper Length More than 2 pages n/a n/a 2 pages or less
0 – 8 points 9 – 11 points 12 – 14

points

 15 points
Clear and Professional Writing and APA/Bluebook Format Errors impede professional presentation; guidelines not followed. Significant errors that do not impede professional presentation. Few errors that do not impede professional presentation. Writing and format are clear, professional, APA/Bluebook compliant, and error free.

Unit 1 Assignment Case Brief Template

Olympic Airways v. Husain Case Brief
Who are the parties to the case?
What is the citation of the case?
What are the basic facts of the case?
What Dr. Hanson’s estate argue?
What did Olympic Air argue?
What did the court decide?
Did the court apply statutory law, case law or both in reaching its decision?

References