CASE BRIEF 12.1 Yale Diagnostic Radiology v. Estate of Fountain 838 A.2d 179 (Conn. 2003) FACTS: In March, 1996, Harun Fountain was shot in the back of the head at point-blank range by a playmate. As a result of his injuries, including the loss of his right eye, Fountain required extensive lifesaving medical services from a variety of medical services providers, including Yale Diagnostic Radiology (plaintiff). The expenses at Yale totaled $17,694. Yale billed Vernetta Turner-Tucker (Tucker), Fountain's mother, but the bill went unpaid and, in 1999, Yale obtained a judgment against her. In January, 2001, all of Tucker's debts were discharged in bankruptcy, including the Yale judgment. Tucker filed suit against the boy who had shot Fountain. However, Fountain succumbed to his injuries, passing away before the case was settled. The settlement on the tort case was placed into probate court as part of Fountain’s estate. Tucker was the administrator of Fountain’s estate. When the settlement was deposited, Yale asked the probate court for payment of its $17,694 judgment from the estate. DECISION BELOW: The Probate Court denied the motion. Yale appealed to the trial court, and the trial court held for Yale. Tucker and the estate (defendants) appealed. ISSUE ON APPEAL: Can minors be held liable for necessaries when their parents cannot or refuse to pay? DECISION: . . . we conclude that Connecticut recognizes the doctrine of necessaries. We further conclude that, pursuant to the doctrine, the defendants are liable for payment to the plaintiff for the services rendered to Fountain. When a medical service provider renders necessary medical care to an injured minor, two contracts arise: the primary contract between the provider and the minor's parents; and an implied in law contract between the provider and the minor himself. The primary contract between the provider and the parents is based on the parents' duty to pay for their children's necessary expenses, under both common law and statute. Such contracts, where not express, may be implied in fact and generally arise both from the parties' conduct and their reasonable expectations. The primacy of this contract means that the provider of necessaries must make all reasonable efforts to collect from the parents before resorting to the secondary, implied in law contract with the minor. The present case illustrates the inequity that would arise if no implied in law contract arose between Fountain and plaintiff. Fountain received, through a settlement with the boy who caused his injuries, funds that were calculated, at least in part, on the costs of the medical services provided to him by the plaintiff in the wake of those injuries. This fact further supports a determination of an implied in law contract under the circumstances of the case. Tucker had four years to pay the plaintiff's bill for the services rendered to ...

1. CASE BRIEF 12.1
Yale Diagnostic Radiology v. Estate of Fountain
838 A.2d 179 (Conn. 2003)
FACTS: In March, 1996, Harun Fountain was shot in the back
of the head at point-blank range by
a playmate. As a result of his injuries, including the loss of his
right eye, Fountain required
extensive lifesaving medical services from a variety of medical
services providers, including Yale
Diagnostic Radiology (plaintiff). The expenses at Yale totaled
$17,694. Yale billed Vernetta
Turner-Tucker (Tucker), Fountain's mother, but the bill went
unpaid and, in 1999, Yale obtained
a judgment against her. In January, 2001, all of Tucker's debts
were discharged in bankruptcy,
including the Yale judgment.
Tucker filed suit against the boy who had shot Fountain.
However, Fountain succumbed to his

2. injuries, passing away before the case was settled. The
settlement on the tort case was placed into
probate court as part of Fountain’s estate. Tucker was the
administrator of Fountain’s estate.
When the settlement was deposited, Yale asked the probate
court for payment of its $17,694
judgment from the estate.
DECISION BELOW: The Probate Court denied the motion.
Yale appealed to the trial court, and
the trial court held for Yale. Tucker and the estate (defendants)
appealed.
ISSUE ON APPEAL: Can minors be held liable for necessaries
when their parents cannot or refuse
to pay?
DECISION: . . . we conclude that Connecticut recognizes the
doctrine of necessaries. We further
conclude that, pursuant to the doctrine, the defendants are liable
for payment to the plaintiff for
the services rendered to Fountain.
When a medical service provider renders necessary medical care
to an injured minor, two contracts

3. arise: the primary contract between the provider and the minor's
parents; and an implied in law
contract between the provider and the minor himself. The
primary contract between the provider
and the parents is based on the parents' duty to pay for their
children's necessary expenses, under
both common law and statute. Such contracts, where not
express, may be implied in fact and
generally arise both from the parties' conduct and their
reasonable expectations. The primacy of
this contract means that the provider of necessaries must make
all reasonable efforts to collect
from the parents before resorting to the secondary, implied in
law contract with the minor.
The present case illustrates the inequity that would arise if no
implied in law contract arose between
Fountain and plaintiff. Fountain received, through a settlement
with the boy who caused his
injuries, funds that were calculated, at least in part, on the costs
of the medical services provided
to him by the plaintiff in the wake of those injuries. This fact
further supports a determination of
an implied in law contract under the circumstances of the case.

4. Tucker had four years to pay the plaintiff's bill for the services
rendered to Fountain. She did not
pay that bill even when the plaintiff pursued a collection action
against her. These facts are
sufficient to show that Tucker was unwilling or unable to pay
for Fountain's necessary medical
services.
Affirmed.
Questions
1. Describe the series of events that led to Yale requesting that
the minor pay for the medical
services.
2. What public policy issues and concerns result from this
decision?
3. What benefits does the decision provide?

5. CASE BRIEF 12.4
Hawkins v. Globe Life Insurance
105 F.Supp.3d 430 (D. N.J. 2015)
FACTS: In late August 2011, Natasha Hawkins (plaintiff)
applied for a second life insurance on
her nineteen year-old son, Khalil Wallace, from Globe Life
Insurance Company. After Globe
received Ms. Hawkins’ enrollment form and premium payment,
but before Globe formally
approved the policy, Khalil was murdered. Globe refused to
pay the policy proceeds, and Ms.
Hawkins filed suit.
Globe mailed plaintiff an advertisement for up to $50,000 in life
insurance protection. The
materials included two informational pamphlets, a letter, and an
enrollment form. The following
summary lists representations from these materials:
Pamphlet 1
• First-day coverage

6. • No waiting period
• Buy direct by mail
• Choose $5,000, $10,000, $20,000, $30,000 or $50,000
coverage
• $1.00 for $50,000
• No medical exam − just answer a few health questions
Pamphlet 2
• Start a Life Insurance Policy for Only $1
Letter
x)
• Buy Direct by Mail (2x)
• $1.00 Starts Up To $50,000 Life Insurance Coverage
• Globe gives you life insurance coverage that costs only $1.00
to start!
• There's no medical exam ... just answer a few Yes/No health
questions
• You buy directly through the mail
• Answer A Few Yes/No Health Questions (2x)
Enrollment Form/Application

7. • No waiting period
• $1 Buys Up to $50,000
• $1 Buys $50,000 − Direct by Mail
• You can choose from $5,000, $10,000, $20,000, $30,000 or
even $50,000 life insurance
coverage
• There is no medical exam − just a few Yes/No health
questions
Globe's enrollment form contains Question 2.b. This question
asks whether in the past three years
Khalil “had or been treated for ... drug or alcohol abuse.”
[P]laintiff was aware her son was
previously arrested and charged with multiple drug offenses. It
is also undisputed that subsequent
to one of Khalil's arrests, plaintiff arranged for Khalil to attend
a few counseling sessions with a
general therapist. However, plaintiff denied any knowledge of
what her son discussed with his
therapist during these sessions. She also denied any knowledge
that her son used drugs. Plaintiff

8. testified that despite her son's troubled past she did not believe
he abused drugs. She noted that her
son was an athlete and never showed symptoms of drug abuse.
After plaintiff mailed the enrollment form, Khalil was charged
on September 2, 2011, with
possession of marijuana. Plaintiff learned about this arrest
within a few days, but did not inform
Globe.
[P]laintiff's application was subject to a “Quality Assurance”
(“QA”) follow-up call. Globe
attempted to telephone plaintiff 21 times and sent two letters to
verify the truth of the statements
on her enrollment form.
On September 20, 2011, plaintiff's son disappeared into a van
with unidentified individuals. On
September 22, 2011, plaintiff was informed that her son was
last seen two days prior and that his
cell phone was found in Philadelphia. The same day plaintiff
filed a missing person report with
the state police. Despite these events, plaintiff testified she was
not concerned for her son's safety

9. following his disappearance because he would often be away
from home for periods of more than
two weeks at a time. Additionally, plaintiff testified that when
she filed the missing person report
the police believed her son had run off to avoid charges from
his recent arrest.
On September 28, 2011, plaintiff called Globe to complete the
QA. During the call, . . . [t]he Globe
representative asked plaintiff whether the proposed insured had
a history of drug or alcohol abuse.
Plaintiff again denied any knowledge that her son had a history
of drug or alcohol abuse or
treatment and affirmed that her answers were true to the best of
her knowledge.
Following the QA call, Globe formally approved plaintiff's
policy on October 1, 2011. On October
6, 2011, six days after the policy was issued, Khalil Wallace's
body was found. The cause of death
was determined to be multiple gunshot wounds inflicted on
September 20, 2011, the day Khalil
went missing. Plaintiff called Globe to report her son's death
on October 24, 2011, and submitted
her claim for payment on February 6, 2012. On February 21,

10. 2012, Globe advised it was
investigating the claim. Following an exchange of letters
between Globe and plaintiff, on July 6,
2012, Globe advised that it was voiding its policy because
plaintiff misrepresented material facts
during the application process.
Globe received plaintiff's application materials on September 9,
2011, and deposited the premium
check on September 12, 2011. For the reasons described above,
this initiated interim coverage on
Khalil's life as of September 9 or 12, 2011. Accordingly,
plaintiff had interim coverage when
Khalil died on September 20, 2011.
ISSUE: Was there a valid policy in place?
DECISION: The court held that there was a policy in place.
The plaintiff did nothing wrong
because the questions were ambiguous and construed against the
insurer. The fine print created
ambiguities in what the insurer was doing. Ambiguities are
construed against insurers.
https://a.next.westlaw.com/Link/Document/FullText?entityType

11. =gdrug&entityId=Iff1648e16c7111e18b05fdf15589d8e8&origin
ationContext=document&transitionType=DocumentItem&contex
tData=(sc.Default)
Questions
1. What were the problems with Globe’s marketing materials?
2. Develop a timeline for the events from the time of the policy
mailer. Why are Khalil’s arrest
and previous counseling not required to be disclosed?
3. Describe how Globe should have asked its questions.
CASE BRIEF 12.5
Sons of Thunder, Inc. v. Borden, Inc.
690 A.2d 575 (N.J. 1997)
FACTS: Borden hired Donald De Musz to captain one of its
clam boats. Over time, De Musz
formed a business, in reliance upon Borden’s ongoing business,
to buy boats and participate in the

12. expensive Shuck-at-Sea program. Eventually, De Musz had
borrowed a great deal, spent a great
deal only to have Borden pull out of its side of the agreements.
De Musz filed suit.
DECISION BELOW: The jury found for De Musz. The Court
of Appeals affirmed.
ISSUE ON APPEAL: Was Borden required to compensate De
Musz for its abrupt and early
termination of the relationship?
DECISION: Yes. The jury award of one year’s profit was fair.
Great reliance by De Musz in the
situation. Mandated good faith.
Questions
1.Were all the De Musz corporations completely dependent on
Borden?
2.What impact does "good faith" have on termination of a
contract?
3.What are the damages when there is a lack of good faith in the
termination of a contract?

13. 4.What provisions would you suggest be added to a contract
such as this in which the
relationship is one of contract, but also one of dependence?
Rubic_Print_FormatCourse CodeClass CodeAssignment
TitleTotal PointsNRS-434VNNRS-434VN-O508Benchmark -
Human Experience Across the Health-Illness
Continuum100.0CriteriaPercentageUnsatisfactory (0.00%)Less
than Satisfactory (75.00%)Satisfactory (79.00%)Good
(89.00%)Excellent (100.00%)CommentsPoints
EarnedContent80.0%Health-Illness Importance to Health and
Patient Care (Benchmarked: 5.1. Understand the human
experience across the health-illness continuum.) 30.0%A
discussion on the importance of the health-illness continuum is
not presented. A partial summary on the importance of the
health-illness continuum is presented. The summary does not
fully include the relation of the continuum to health and the
human experience in patient care. There are significant
inaccuracies. More evidence or information is needed.A general
discussion on the importance of the health-illness in relation to
health and the human experience in patient care is presented.
The discussion generally establishes that the health-illness
continuum is important to patient care. There are some
inaccuracies. More information or rationale is needed.A
discussion on the importance of the health-illness in relation to
health and the human experience in patient care is presented.
The discussion demonstrates that the health-illness continuum is
important to patient care. Some rationale is needed for clarity.A
discussion on the importance of the health-illness continuum in
relation to health and the human experience in patient care is
presented. The discussion demonstrates that the health-illness
continuum is important to patient care. Strong rationale is

14. offered for support.Refection on Personal State of Health and
the Health Illness Continuum30.0%Reflection on personal
overall state of health is omitted. A partial summary of
personal overall state of health is included. The summary is not
informative. Behaviors supporting or detracting from health and
well-being are omitted or incomplete. A general discussion of
personal overall state of health is included. Overall the
discussion demonstrates some insight into some behaviors
supporting or detracting from health and well-being. The author
does not clearly establish where personal health falls on the
health-illness continuum.A discussion of personal state of
health is included. The discussion demonstrates personal insight
into overall behaviors supporting or detracting from health and
well-being. The author establishes where personal health falls
on the health-illness continuum.A well-developed discussion of
personal state of health is included. The discussion
demonstrates strong personal insight into behaviors supporting
or detracting from health and well-being. The author clearly
establishes where personal health falls on the health-illness
continuum. Resources Supporting Wellness20.0%Options and
resources available to help the author move toward wellness on
the health-illness continuum are omitted.Partial options and
resources available that would help the author move toward
wellness on the health-illness continuum are presented. It is
unclear how this will assist in moving the author toward
wellness.General options and resources available that would
help the author move toward wellness on the health-illness
continuum are presented. More information is needed to
establish how this will assist in moving the author toward
wellness.Options and resources available that would reasonably
help the author move toward wellness on the health-illness
continuum are presented. The author establishes how these
resources will assist in moving toward wellness.Options and
resources available that would be extremely helpful to help the
author move toward wellness on the health-illness continuum
are presented. The author clearly establishes how these will

15. assist in moving toward wellness. Insight into wellness as it
pertains to the health illness continuum is
demonstrated.Organization and Effectiveness 15.0%Thesis
Development and Purpose5.0%Paper lacks any discernible
overall purpose or organizing claim.Thesis is insufficiently
developed or vague. Purpose is not clear.Thesis is apparent and
appropriate to purpose.Thesis is clear and forecasts the
development of the paper. Thesis is descriptive and reflective of
the arguments and appropriate to the purpose.Thesis is
comprehensive and contains the essence of the paper. Thesis
statement makes the purpose of the paper clear.Argument Logic
and Construction5.0%Statement of purpose is not justified by
the conclusion. The conclusion does not support the claim
made. Argument is incoherent and uses noncredible
sources.Sufficient justification of claims is lacking. Argument
lacks consistent unity. There are obvious flaws in the logic.
Some sources have questionable credibility.Argument is
orderly, but may have a few inconsistencies. The argument
presents minimal justification of claims. Argument logically,
but not thoroughly, supports the purpose. Sources used are
credible. Introduction and conclusion bracket the thesis.
Argument shows logical progressions. Techniques of
argumentation are evident. There is a smooth progression of
claims from introduction to conclusion. Most sources are
authoritative.Clear and convincing argument that presents a
persuasive claim in a distinctive and compelling manner. All
sources are authoritative.Mechanics of Writing (includes
spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use)5.0%Surface
errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of
meaning. Inappropriate word choice or sentence construction is
used.Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the
reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register), sentence
structure, or word choice are present.Some mechanical errors or
typos are present, but they are not overly distracting to the
reader. Correct sentence structure and audience-appropriate
language are used. Prose is largely free of mechanical errors,

16. although a few may be present. A variety of sentence structures
and effective figures of speech are used. Writer is clearly in
command of standard, written, academic
English.Format5.0%Paper Format (use of appropriate style for
the major and assignment)2.0%Template is not used
appropriately or documentation format is rarely followed
correctly.Template is used, but some elements are missing or
mistaken; lack of control with formatting is apparent.Template
is used, and formatting is correct, although some minor errors
may be present. Template is fully used; There are virtually no
errors in formatting style.All format elements are correct.
Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references,
bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and
style)3.0%Sources are not documented.Documentation of
sources is inconsistent or incorrect, as appropriate to
assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors.Sources
are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style,
although some formatting errors may be present.Sources are
documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format
is mostly correct. Sources are completely and correctly
documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format
is free of error.Total Weightage100%