Kleinknecht vs gettysburg. Kleinknecht v. Gettysburg College :: Pennsylvania Middle District Court :: Federal Court Proceeding No. Civ. A. No. 1:CV 2022-10-27
Kleinknecht vs gettysburg
Rating:
4,6/10
1750
reviews
It is unclear what you are asking for in regards to the topic of "kleinknecht vs Gettysburg." Kleinknecht is a surname and it is not clear how it relates to the Battle of Gettysburg, which was a major turning point in the American Civil War.
The Battle of Gettysburg took place from July 1-3, 1863, in and around the town of Gettysburg, Pennsylvania. It was fought between the Union Army, led by General George Meade, and the Confederate Army, led by General Robert E. Lee. The Union Army was victorious, and the battle is considered a turning point in the Civil War because it marked the end of Confederate advances into the North and the beginning of a Union counter-offensive.
There were more than 50,000 casualties in the Battle of Gettysburg, making it one of the bloodiest battles in American history. It is remembered as a key moment in American history and is the subject of numerous books, films, and other works of art and media.
Without more context or information, it is not possible to write an essay about "kleinknecht vs Gettysburg." If you have a specific topic or question in mind, please provide more information so that I can better assist you.
Kleinknecht v. Gettysburg College :: Pennsylvania Middle District Court :: Federal Court Proceeding No. Civ. A. No. 1:CV
Janczyk has admitted that he did not check Drew's pulse. Plaintiffs therefore argue that Moore "may not have truly assessed Drew's breathing. The plaintiffs' remaining medical experts were even more general and spoke more to the effects of the delay in medical treatment on the assumption that the College had a duty to provide CPR trained people from the onset of practice. June 3, 1985 , rev'd on other grounds, 494 N. Kleinknecht, Personal Representative of the Estate of Drew R.
Next
Kleinknecht v. Gettysburg College on Apple Books
The decision made by the court was based on a pure foreseeability or negligence tort. To give it any greater mystique would unduly hamper our system of jurisprudence in adjusting to the changing times. There the plaintiff had attended a sophomore class picnic sponsored by his college. This section provides in pertinent part: The courts of appeals. Gettysburg College, 786 F.
Next
Kleinknecht v. Gettysburg College, 786 F. Supp. 449 (M.D. Pa. 1992) :: Justia
The question of breach must be reconsidered on remand in light of this Court's holding that the College did owe Drew a duty of care to provide prompt and adequate emergency medical assistance to Drew while participating as one of its intercollegiate athletes in a school-sponsored athletic activity. The law clearly states, however, that appellee may be held liable only for those risks a person in his position could reasonably have foreseen. Neither coach had certification in CPR. Polizzotti estimated that it took him no more than thirty seconds to get to the training room and the College estimates that it took Moore only about two minutes to get to Drew's side on the field. According to Coach Janczyk, he and Coach Anderson had never discussed how they would handle an emergency during fall lacrosse practice. One of them phoned Planck Gymnasium where Head Trainer Donolli was located and he was informed of the emergency. Because it is foreseeable that student athletes may sustain severe and even life-threatening injuries while engaged in athletic activity, the Kleinknechts argue that the College's duty of care required it to be ready to respond swiftly and adequately to a medical emergency.
Next
KLEINKNECHT V. GETTYSBURG COLLEGE CASE BRIEF
It was held on the softball fields outside Musselman Stadium. We will therefore enter summary judgment in favor of the College on the plaintiffs' claim that it was negligent in failing to provide CPR trained coaches and trainers at the practice or otherwise have in place measures to deal immediately with Drew's cardiac arrest. The plaintiffs have also criticized the actions of Janczyk and assistant coach, Donald Anderson, in supposedly keeping the other players away from Drew. . The nearest telephone was inside the training room at Musselman Stadium, roughly 200-250 yards away. There is a duty if the court says there is a duty; the law, like the Constitution, is what we make it.
Next
Kleinknecht vs Gettysburg complianceportal.american.edu
The court nevertheless stated that if the immunity law were applicable, Head Coach Henry L. The district court initially denied the motion on November 1, 1991, but then granted the College's motion for reconsideration on January 9, 1992. However, she simply monitored his condition, noting that he had no bruises or lacerations, but not attempting CPR or any other first aid technique. Page 1360 989 F. They estimate that it took Polizzotti a minute and a half to arrive at the stadium training room from the practice field, advise someone on duty, and have that person notify Donolli.
Next
989 F2d 1360 Kleinknecht v. Gettysburg College W Kleinknecht
Student trainers were assigned to cover both spring practices and games. In 1988, it had an enrollment of about two thousand students and supported twenty-one intercollegiate sports teams involving approximately 525 male and female athletes. § 8332 a , applies here. Drew was a twenty year old sophomore at Gettysburg and was participating in an off-season lacrosse practice on September 16, 1988. Brief for Appellee at 8.
Next
Kleinknecht v. Gettysburg College
The motion is granted and our order of November 1, 1991, is vacated. One of the plaintiffs' medical experts, Dr. Thus, the Kleinknechts contend that evidence exists from which a jury could infer that as long as twelve minutes elapsed before CPR was administered. The Kleinknechts also estimate that it took Kerney two minutes and thirteen seconds to arrive at the College Union Building, speak to the student at the desk, and then have the secretary telephone for an ambulance. The type of foreseeability that determines a duty of care, as opposed to proximate cause, is not dependent on the foreseeability of a specific event.
Next
Kleinknecht v. Gettysburg College, No. 92
According to a teammate observing from the sidelines, Drew simply stepped away from the play and dropped to the ground. The determination that the College owes a duty of care to its intercollegiate athletes could merely define the class of persons to whom the duty extends, without determining the nature of the duty or demands it makes on the College. KLEINKNECHT, Personal Representative of the Estate of Drew R. In order to prevail on a cause of action in negligence under Pennsylvania law, a plaintiff must establish: 1 a duty or obligation recognized by the law, requiring the actor to conform to a certain standard of conduct; 2 a failure to conform to the standard required; 3 a causal connection between the conduct and the resulting injury; and 4 actual loss or damage resulting to the interests of another. Essentially for the reasons set out by the district court, I would hold that the facts upon which the plaintiffs relied were insufficient to establish a breach of Gettysburg College's duty to participants in its intercollegiate athletic program.
Next
Gove Case Summary Kleinknecht V Gettysburg College [qn85w2xq91n1]
The College admits that upon Drew suffering his medical emergency it had a duty of care, but it argues that the record shows that duty was satisfied. Rawlings, on which the College relies in support of its position that it has no duty of care to its students. The Law would have applied to Moore, however. The shortest route to this telephone required scaling an eight-foot high cyclone fence surrounding the stadium. Likewise, in Zanine v.
Next
KLEINKNECHT v. GETTYSBURG
In 1982, the Pennsylvania General Assembly passed 42 Pa. One of the players, Daniel Polizzotti, also ran toward the stadium, where a training room was located and where he knew a student trainer could be found. It predicts only that a court applying Pennsylvania law would conclude that the College had a duty to provide prompt and adequate emergency medical services to Drew, one of its intercollegiate athletes, while he was engaged in a school-sponsored athletic activity for which he had been recruited. Kleinknecht, in their own right, Appellants. No one knew precisely what had happened and a spinal injury was suspected.
Next