What is proportional liability based on a percentage of fault?
930603
It means that when there is an accident, both parties can be deemed to have some fault in the accident.  If you hold any liability, the amount you can recover is based upon that amount.  If the other person is 50% at fault, you can recover 50%.  If the other person is 20% at fault, you can recover 20%.  Each state handles their percentages differently, saying how fault and recovery can be assessed.
271169
It's "debt/equity" ratio.  Divide the debt by the company worth to find the percentage of debt the company has.
641862
Mitigation of damages takes into account other actions (esp. by the plaintiff) that could have contributed to the extent of the damage caused. e.g. If you are involved in a car accident, while driving w/out a seat belt and suffer terrible physical injury as a result, then the erring driver will be responsible for causing the accident but not necessarily the extent of the injuries which could have been reduced had you been wearing your seat belt. The court may reduce the damages awarded in a civil suit by 15%.
785127
If there was a lawsuit won against the company for damages then the liablity is "Limited" to the assets of the company, not the assets of the owners of that company, that is the main difference, there are also different regulations regarding the reporting of accounts etc.
264463
There is such a thing as criminal negligence.  Let me give you an example:  If a person is drowning in a pool and you are holding the lifesaver ring and don't throw it to them, then you are committing a crime of inaction (if it can be demonstrated that you were capable of throwing the ring).  As far are accidents go, you probably can't be held accountable for such a thing because of the diffusion of responsibility that comes with being a motorist on a highway.  Each person who passes the accident might reasonably believe that someone else has or will report it.  As for whether you can be prosecuted:  The reality is that a prosecutor can charge you with any crime at any time, regardless of circumstances or evidence.  The questions you need to be more concerned with are how likely is the prosecution, and how likely is a conviction.  In the case of your question the answers are: not very likely, and not a snow-balls chance in hell of conviction provided you give even a half-assed reason why you had something better to do than report the accident (ie my phone battery was dead).
234634
Liability coverages in general cover damages you cause to others.  There is Property Damages (to property such as cars, houses, personal items, etc) and Bodily Injury (injuries caused to a person).  The minimums vary from state-to-state, but almost all states require at least these two to be carried on a policy.
809295
18/360 *100=5%\nthe claims regenuine,not tall claims
637710
In contributory negligence jurisdictions, (Al, Md, Va, and I think NC and DC), Ramona takes nothing. Her negligence was a contributing factor to the injury and, as a result, John does not have to pay any damages.\n\nIn comparative negligence jurisdictions (everywhere else), Ramona's recovery is decreased by her comparative fault. So $75,000 - (0.20 * $75,000) = $60,000\n\nMany jurisdictions have a modified comparative fault standard, where if the injured party is more than fifty percent at fault, they take nothing. So, in your hypo in one of those jurisdictions, if Ramona was 51% at fault, she would get $0.00.
1060852
There is a doctrine called "assumption of the risk." If you have been told of the risk and you decide you know better that the authorities, and it turns out you made a stupid decision, why should the state be held liable?
871703
Sorry, if the result can be greater than 1 then you ain't estimating a proportion.  For proportions each unit in the sample gives you either 0 or 1 as a result.\n\nYou need to swith to the general case where you calculate the standard deviation from the sum of squared differences from the mean, etc. PQ/n or whatever cannot be applied.
380269
Probably a divide by zero error.
192872
You must look at the formula for standard deviation of the sample distribution of (I'm thinking) binomial distributions. The proportion "p" is a parameter of the formula. You should check it out but, if I remember correctly, it's:\ns.d. of the sample distribution = sqrt[p*(p-1)/n]
1079294
It's based on your payrolls.  You'll need to contact the agent that provides your general liability, auto liability, and inland marine (cargo) coverage for a workers comp quote.
90701
Tax Base and Rate\n\nFlorida corporate income tax liability is computed using federal taxable income, modified by certain Florida adjustments, to determine adjusted federal income. A corporation doing business within and without Florida may apportion its total income. Adjusted federal income is apportioned to Florida using a three-factor formula. The formula is a weighted average, designating 25 percent each to factors for property and payroll, and 50 percent to sales. Nonbusiness income allocated to Florida is added to the Florida portion of adjusted federal income. An exemption of up to $5,000 is subtracted to arrive at Florida net income. Tax is computed by multiplying Florida net income by 5.5 percent.
474340
well u can look up driving statics on triple a website and go to any auto insurance website to help find data to support your answers
86662
Check The Policy\n\nPayment could depend on the age, cost, and current cost of the equipment.  Other pay off facts may be the safety of the building, insurance agent, and policy.  You can disagree with the agent who settles it.  You may be able to get an attorney if you think they are not treating you fairly or paying enough money.  Good luck
1063982
tortious liability revolves around duties fixed by law. distinguish this from contractual liability where duties are fixed (barginnd) by the parties.\n\nthe courts are clear there is no bar from claiming remedies for breach of a duty and for breach of contract.\nsee Hedley Burne v Heler\n\nstrict liability is liability without fault (was the damage reasonably forseeable) remember strict liability is not absolute liablility and is worth researching some of the law on this area.\nRylands v Fletcher.\nWringe v Cohen