Comments | fandom_lawyers: Tortfeasor!Edward, Tribal Jurisdicton, and Intentional Infliction of Mental Distress by Werewolf

akemi42 in fandom_lawyers

Tortfeasor!Edward, Tribal Jurisdicton, and Intentional Infliction of Mental Distress by Werewolf

Feb 03, 2009 20:41

I know it's been a while, but I think it's time for me to look at all the torts that occur in Twilight...

( Torts: Edward is such a tortfeasor )

Comments 11

stardust_rain February 4 2009, 07:46:56 UTC

You dazzle me.

So much that I am printing this out and putting a copy in every law book that I own. To keep me from going fucking insane during exam period.

akemi42 February 6 2009, 16:58:26 UTC

LOL! Thanks.

Not a lawyer, but I'll play along anyway... st_pacifica February 4 2009, 08:31:28 UTC

Additionally there is a Washington dog statute that creates strict liability for the owner once the dog has bitten in a public place or bites a licensee or invitee.

Are werewolves considered "dogs" under Washington State Law?

Also, if vampirism and lycanthropy are considered medical conditions, might some disability statutes apply?

Re: Not a lawyer, but I'll play along anyway... akemi42 February 6 2009, 16:59:06 UTC

Hmmmm that's a good question.

dreagoddess February 6 2009, 03:16:58 UTC

In Washington, a parent is generally not liable for the torts of their child unless the child is acting as the parent’s agent. However if the child commits an intentional tort, the parent may be liable for up to $5000. Thus, Carlisle and Esme might have to pay for all Edward’s biting and trespassing.But this only applies until the child has reached the age of majority. Edward is around 90, so Carlisle and Esme are no longer liable for his conduct. Also, there's some question about whether Carlisle ever legally adopted Edward, so he wouldn't be liable at all. Of course, assuming that there was a legal adoption, you might be able to make the argument that because vampires don't actually age, Edward never reached the age of majority and thus Carlisle and Esme would still be liable ( ... )

akemi42 February 6 2009, 16:57:46 UTC

But this only applies until the child has reached the age of majority. Edward is around 90, so Carlisle and Esme are no longer liable for his conduct.

I like to think of him as 17 because it makes the legal issues more interesting. :) If he ever really got sued, he would have to pretend as if that were the case anyway since it is what all his documentation says.

Also, there's some question about whether Carlisle ever legally adopted Edward, so he wouldn't be liable at all.
Washington favors the finality of adoption so even if it wasn't 100% kosher I bet it would be accepted.

For defamation, what about Irina's claim that Renesmee was an immortal child?

Oooooh good one!

dreagoddess February 6 2009, 17:21:50 UTC

If he ever really got sued, he would have to pretend as if that were the case anyway since it is what all his documentation says.

That's true, but if you're assuming that the issue of vampirism wouldn't come up if they're sued, then you're going to have a hard time proving up most of the assaults because there's no reason that a normal person hissing or crouching would put a reasonable person in apprehension of a battery. You'd still have the biting, though.

akemi42 February 6 2009, 23:02:55 UTC

LOL! The legal issue of vampirism. ;) I think hissing might be threatening to a reasonable person, but maybe not crouching.

Thread 6

yalegirl03 February 20 2010, 03:54:48 UTC

This sounds like a fun game. But, it would require me to read the Twilight series. :-)