问题 问答题

案情:甲请A搬家公司搬家,A公司派出乙、丙、丁三人前往。在搬家的过程中,乙发现甲家的掌上电脑遗落在一角,便偷偷藏到自己的腰包里;丙与丁在搬运过程中不小心把甲的邻居寅碰伤,同时由于不慎将甲的珍贵兰花折断。为此,甲和丙、丁争吵起来,争吵中,三人不知道是谁又将甲阳台上的另一盆花碰下,砸伤了路人戊,乙、丙、丁见状溜之大吉。
问题:
1.甲的兰花的损失由谁承担以什么为请求权的基础
2.甲遗失的掌上电脑的损失由谁承担
3.路人受到的伤害可以请求谁承担以什么为请求权的基础
4.甲的邻居寅的损害赔偿由谁承担
5.甲、丙、丁三人构成了民法上的什么行为
6.寅可以谁为被告
7.甲在提起对请求赔偿兰花的诉讼中,可以谁为被告

答案

参考答案:1.甲的兰花的损失应该由搬家公司承担,甲可以违约为理由要求搬家公司承担,根据《合同法》第65条和第112条的规定,搬家公司无权拒绝。
2.甲的掌上电脑被乙盗走,属于乙的个人行为,与搬家公司无关。甲只能向乙以侵权为理由请求赔偿,也可以物权请求权要求乙返还掌上电脑。
3.路人的损失可以要求甲、丙、丁承担连带责任,即可以向任何一个人要求承担责任。因为三人构成共同危险行为,根据民法基本理论,共同危险行为人对于损害后果要承担连带赔偿责任,然后在各人之间平均分担。
4.寅的损失应该由搬家公司承担,因为这是搬家公司的工作人员在执行职务的时候造成他人损害的,根据《民法通则》第43条和《民通意见》第58条的规定,应该由法人承担。
5.甲、丙、丁三人不能确定是谁碰下了花盆,并且三人也不能证明其中的一个人确实与损害无关,三人构成共同危险行为。
6.寅应该以搬家公司为被告。根据《民诉意见》第42条的规定:“法人或者其他组织的工作人员因职务行为或者授权行为发生的诉讼,该法人或其他组织为当事人。”
7.甲在要求赔偿兰花的诉讼中,根据《合同法》的规定可以直接要求搬家公司承担责任,以搬家公司为被告。

填空题
单项选择题

Few beyond California’ s technology crowd recognise the name Larry Sonsini; none within its circle could fail to. For four decades he has been lawyer, adviser and friend to many prominent companies and investors. Some consider him the most powerful person in Silicon Valley. Companies beg for his law firm to represent them. The 65-year-old chairman of Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati (WSG&R) has suddenly been thrust into the spotlight: first, for counselling many of the technology firms now under scrutiny for backdating stock options (and in some cases, serving on their boards); and more recently, as outside counsel to Hewlett-Packard (HP), for initially defending the board’s dubious investigative practices.

WSG&R boasts 600 lawyers and represents around half of Silicon Valley’s public companies, including Apple Sun Microsystems and Google. Last year it ranked first in private-equity and venture-capital deals, with nearly twice as many as its closest rival. Over the past five years WSG&R has worked on over 1 000 mergers and acquisitions, collectively worth over $ 260 billion.

The recent troubles cast a shadow over WSG&R’s reputation. Although Mr. Sonsini is not accused of wrongdoing himself, many of his firm’s clients are on the ropes. Former executives at Brocade Communications suffered criminal charges in July, Mr. Sonsini Served on Brocade’s board until last year and his firm was its outside counsel. He also was on the boards of Pixar, Echelon, Lattice Semiconductor, LSI Logic and Novell all firms at which the issuing of stock options is being called into question.

WSG&R dismisses the idea that Mr. Sonsini faced a conflict of interest by acting as both director and legal adviser to so many firms and says he did not advise HP in its investigation of board members. Mr. Sonsini initially said it was "well done and within legal limits". It now seems it was neither.

The statistics in the text indicate ()

A. the fame of WSG&R

B. the notoriety of Larry Sonsini

C. the boom of WSG&R

D. the obligation of Hewlett-Packard