Macys the employee would not be liable an extremely

Info icon This preview shows pages 2–4. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Macy’s, the employee would not be liable An extremely important part of analysis is looking at the details – important for exam, probably Contributory vs. comparative negligence These are defenses Contributory negligence o If people are both at fault (both are contributing to accident), then each cannot sue the other This is the older rule o Many states have contributory Comparative negligence o Newer rule o Assesses not just who is at fault, but also who has the greater fault o McDonald’s hot coffee case Coffee was intentionally heated to higher than average temperature Woman placed coffee between her knees Both were at fault, but levels of fault were different Said that McDonald’s was 90% at fault, and the woman was 10% at fault Soldano case Soldano was in bar, got in fight, was threatened Friend asked bartender to use phone, bartender refused Soldano was shot and killed Son brought case to recover damage Son lost in lower court, since bartender had no obligation to act Higher court had reversed decision o Since there was no real burden on bartender, he should have called Recall that courts have now been setting up categories, where there are situations where you do have responsibility to do something Court says this is a situation that doesn’t even need a category o Given that there was so little asked, and there was no burden on the bartender, the concept of not having a duty to act must be bound further o Remember that this varies state to state Case Plaintiff in restaurant goes to bathroom, slips, falls, get injured, and needs surgery No warning that bathroom was dangerous Lower court and upper court both agree that the wet floor in restaurant could be foreseeable o Bathroom was supposed to be checked every hour Restaurant owner was liable
Image of page 2

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Look at requirements for negligence o Restaurant owner has a requirement to serve you In general, you must do what is reasonable This didn’t happen in this case o Janitor and wait staff did not check bathrrom Restaurant had rules, but it didn’t enforce them o Not enforcing the rule is just as good as not having the rule Doing what you’re supposed to do doesn’t mean nothing will ever happen o You just need to meet standard of care Case
Image of page 3
Image of page 4
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

{[ snackBarMessage ]}

What students are saying

  • Left Quote Icon

    As a current student on this bumpy collegiate pathway, I stumbled upon Course Hero, where I can find study resources for nearly all my courses, get online help from tutors 24/7, and even share my old projects, papers, and lecture notes with other students.

    Student Picture

    Kiran Temple University Fox School of Business ‘17, Course Hero Intern

  • Left Quote Icon

    I cannot even describe how much Course Hero helped me this summer. It’s truly become something I can always rely on and help me. In the end, I was not only able to survive summer classes, but I was able to thrive thanks to Course Hero.

    Student Picture

    Dana University of Pennsylvania ‘17, Course Hero Intern

  • Left Quote Icon

    The ability to access any university’s resources through Course Hero proved invaluable in my case. I was behind on Tulane coursework and actually used UCLA’s materials to help me move forward and get everything together on time.

    Student Picture

    Jill Tulane University ‘16, Course Hero Intern