Everyone owes each other a duty of ordinary care—but what is “ordinary”? How does one act reasonably to meet this burden? This Comment analyzes the current reasonable person standard for disabled plaintiffs and the corresponding duty of “ordinary care” provided by defendants through a critical disability studies lens. The current system of tort law burdens disabled plaintiffs with accommodating themselves, rather than requiring defendants to include accessible care in meeting their duty of ordinary care. To make the distribution of accommodative labor more equitable, this Comment proposes three stackable changes: (1) courts should reinterpret defendants’ duty of ordinary care to include care of individuals with disabilities by eliminating the doctrine that tortfeasors owe accommodations to people with disabilities only if they are on notice of their disabilities; (2) courts could…
This category refers to crimes committed by employees or insiders against their own organizations. It is often the most damaging because the perpetrator has authorized access to systems.
- Asset Misappropriation: The most common form, involving the theft of company resources. This ranges from simple “skimming” (taking cash before it’s recorded) to complex schemes involving the theft of inventory or intellectual property.
- Payroll Fraud: Employees may create “ghost employees” on the system, falsify their own timesheets to claim unworked overtime, or divert salary payments to their own accounts.
- Financial Statement Fraud: Management deliberately misrepresents the company’s financial health by inflating revenue or hiding liabilities to attract investors or meet performance bonuses.