We're Open
+44 7340 9595 39
+44 20 3239 6980

Peters v. Detman Coursework

  100% Pass and No Plagiarism Guaranteed

Peters v. Detman Coursework

Peters v. Detman Coursework


Organize a proof of your conclusion of what the law is using the following CRRAC model (a predictive form of IRAC):


C:  Your conclusion—is the element of the cause of action met?

R:  The rule or principle—the law that tells you the element is met.

E:  Rule proof—explain the cases where you found the rule by giving the critical facts from the case, the reasoning and holding of the court. 

A:  Apply the rule to the facts of the Peters/Detman dispute by showing how they are “like” or “unlike” the facts of the precedent case.  If there is counter analysis, put it here.  This is what you think Detman might assert, but do not say, “Detman may assert…” because there are more effective ways to couch it. 


C:  Restate you conclusion.  “Therefore…”                     


For instance, one of the elements for an IIED claim is that the wrongdoer’s conduct was “outrageous.”  Here is an example of how to prove that Detman’s conduct was outrageous using a synthesized rule from the Dominguez and LaPorte cases. 


A Florida court would hold that Detman’s conduct was outrageous when he refused to turn out his beach lights, so Peters could emerge from her nude swim in privacy.  Outrageous behavior arises when an actor has actual or apparent authority over the other knowing that the other is peculiarly susceptible to emotional distress by reason of “a physical or mental condition or peculiarity,” and demonstrates extreme indifference to the rights of others. Dominguez v. Equitable Life Assurance, 438 So. 2d 58, 62 (Fla. 1983). La Porte v. Assoc. Indep., Inc., 163 So. 2d 267, 268 (Fla. 1964).  

One acting with apparent authority against a susceptible person knowing that emotional distress may result acts outrageously. Dominguez, 438 So. 2d at 62. Dominguez brought suit against his disability insurance company when it ceased payments to him after an agent fraudulently stated to him that he was no longer covered under the policy.  The trial court dismissed his complaint, and the appellate court reversed holding that because Equitable had a position of power over him in wrongly cutting off his payments and being aware of his disabilities and thus his susceptibility to emotional distress, it had acted outrageously against him. Id

One acting with extreme indifference to another’s rights acts outrageously. LaPorte, 163 So. 2d. at 268. In this case the court awarded damages to La Porte for the loss of her dog when a trash collector hurled an empty can at it, killed it, and left laughing. The court held that such an act implies great indifference to the persons, property, or rights of others and is outrageous. Id.

In the same way that the insurance agent had a position of power over Dominguez, Detman was in a position of power over Peters in controlling a light switch and the illumination of a small cove where she, a seventy three year-old woman pleaded with him, cold and naked, to turn off the lights so she could emerge with some modesty from the water while he and his friends watched. Like LaPorte, Detman acted with indifference to Peters’ plight in the water, acting outrageouslyTherefore, acting from a position of power and great indifference over someone Detman knew was helpless will be held as outrageous conduct by a Florida court.


Case Study Name: Institution: Course: Date: Wise & Associates 1133 Westwood Blvd. West Palm Beach, Florida MEMORANDUM TO: Senior PartnerFROM: AssociateDATE: RE: Peters v. Detman This memorandum addresses the potential claims that our client Anne Peters can make against her neighbors, Don and Betty Detman, for the violations of the Florida’s Spite Fence statute and the infliction of emotional distress. Factual Background Anne peters is a seventy threes year old and owns property in West Palm Beach at 915 Sea Crest Drive in Florida. Anne has lived at the residence for most of her life at peace with the rest of the neighbors. However, six months ago some new neighbors, Don and Betty Detman both forty eight years old, moved in at 905 Sea Crest Drive, next to Anne’s property. Don Detman has started out as a center and later on build a successful building company, which he sold to by the property at Sea Crest Drive. After Don moved in, he built a tennis court on the property, on which they would play most of the time. Peters is an avid gardener and has


100% Plagiarism Free & Custom Written,
Tailored to your instructions

International House, 12 Constance Street, London, United Kingdom,
E16 2DQ

UK Registered Company # 11483120

100% Pass Guarantee


View our samples written by our professional writers to let you comprehend how your work is going to look like. We have categorised this into 3 categories with a few different subject domains

View Our Samples

We offer a £ 2999

If your assignment is plagiarised, we will give you £ 2999 in compensation

Recent Updates


  • Title: Peters v. Detman Coursework
  • Price: £ 99
  • Post Date: 2021-08-13T11:56:18+00:00
  • Category: Essays
  • No Plagiarism Guarantee
  • 100% Custom Written

Customer Reviews

Peters v. Detman Coursework Peters v. Detman Coursework
Reviews: 5

A masterpiece of assignment by , written on 2020-03-12

Very professional and effective assignment writing service.
Reviews: 5

A masterpiece of assignment by , written on 2020-03-12

I am not good at designing PowerPoint presentations so I took help from Insta Research. The format is cool and attractive. All the information is nicely placed and used. I am looking forward to presenting so that I could demonstrate my presentation and receive good comments. Thank you for help.