Raw Preview of Attachment:(refer to the detailed question and attachment below)
Negligence Case MemoDanielle GatherightProfessor GulleyBusiness Law02.02.2020Negligence Case MemoMEMORANDUM To: Cassie Cardigan, CEO CARDWARE Inc.Cc: Candie, Model CARDWARE Inc. From: Danielle Gatheright, Paralegal CARDWARE’s Corporate Counsel Date: 28th January, 2020RE: Negligence Requirements and Potential Defenses to Myra’s ClaimIntroductionEvery third party victim injury expects to be compensated; in this case, Myra expects to be compensated because another person, Candie, actually caused her injury. Candie was acting on behalf of the company, CARDWARE Inc., therefore, this compensation is expected from the company. Just before the entire process of compensation, several aspects must be taken into consideration and this includes understanding the legal aspects of the entire process. The first part of this memo identifies the elements that one must establish to bring a cause of action based on negligence case. The elements vary based on the state in consideration while some of the states would consider four elements, others would consider five or more elements and commonly these are; existence of a legal duty to the plaintiff, a breach of that duty by the defendant, an injury to the plaintiff, the injury caused by the breach of the duty and finally, the proximate cause that would relate to the cause in fact. The two defendants CARDWARE and Candie can use the assumption of risk to defend themselves against Myra’s claim. Candie had a legal duty but this did not include protection of the judge, the injury though resulted from the mistake of the model and thus the judge is trying to sue the model and the company so as to get compensation. The Elements Required Winning a Negligence ClaimThere are elements that the complainant must attract and approve before he or she can claim the compensation and win this particular case. The elements are classified under four major categories such as; the duty, the causation (in fact cause and proximate cause), breach and then the damage or the injury. In this case, Candie and CARDWARE Inc are the defendants and Myra is the complainant or the plaintiff. Myra is complaining about an injury that she sustained during the fashion show following the fall of a model whose shoe slipped off to the table of the judges and then it led to the injury of one of the judges. Therefore, in order to win the claim, Myra must prove these four elements; duty, causation, breach and injury or the damages.First element is to consider if Candie and the company had the legal obligation or duty to protect the judges and everyone else at the function; if it was stated that everyone within the event had to be in charge of their own safety then that takes away the legal duty from the company. If the company owed that legal duty to Myra and it failed then there is a case and claim is on the right track. Secondly, the causation is an element to be considered, this is the consideration of if the defendant’s actions really hurt the plaintiff. Myra was hurt by Candie’s shoe and this means that the cause was resulting from the negligence of the model and so this would help the plaintiff to build her case. Therefore, it is very clear here that Candie’s shoe injured Myra unlike in most cases where that is not very clear. Third, breach is simply the failure of the defendant to have held his or her part of the agreement. For instance, if the company had the obligation of protecting the judges but they failed, then this is a breach. It is easy to explain a breach but sometimes very hard to prove it, this would apply if Candie and the company had a duty to protect Myra and the rest but they failed. Finally, the damage or the injury must be considered if it resulted from the breach or failure by the defendant to provide protection to the plaintiff. Candie had 4-inch high heels, then on the runway, a small wrinkle in the carpet that makes Candie’s left shoe get caught and she eventually falls over the end of the runway onto the row of judges and accidentally, Myra is hurt. Potential Defense by Candie Cardigan, CEO CARDWARE Inc The best defense for the defendant is the Assumption of Risk as the main point of concern. The Plaintiff, Myra, had assumed the risk of being within the vicinity and the place of the event and then eventually was injured and this makes it difficult to recover the damages. On the second note, Candie can use the defense of Contributory Negligence so that the plaintiff is not awarded any form of damages for the case in question. Myra already has two elements to use and mention against CARDWARE; while the company also has two defenses that they can use against Myra’s claim. Therefore, if the judge in charge considers that there can be a 50/50 ruling; Myra’s claim can be denied and countered since Contributory Negligence could be the result of the injury and the issues affecting the plaintiff. The outcome of any negligence case against a company has several aspects and elements and this could often have something to do with the breach of the duty. In this case, the company will claim that it did not have such a duty and it was not negligent, in any case; any person in that situation would have acted in the same manner; it was indeed an accident that could not be predicted or prevented. In addition, if there is proof of negligence then the company can argue that the same is not really responsible or directly related to the cause of the injury as caused to the plaintiff. The case can attract monetary damages to help the plaintiff to use in paying hospital bills; on the other hand, punitive damages could be awarded as a way of ensuring that the company is punished for the negligence. There are three possible outcomes of the ruling; the defendant’s way, the plaintiff’s way and most likely, 50-50. The plaintiff, Myra ignored the risk of harm; CARDWARE Inc is liable and in charge of the model, Candi. The defendant, CARDWARE and the plaintiff, Myra, both have reasonable and very valid arguments thus it is upon the judges and the jury to make the conclusion of the case.Yours Sincerely,Danielle GatherightPrivate Paralegal, Cc, For: The CARDWARE’s Corporate CounselReferencesOwen, D.G. (2007). The Five Elements of Negligence. Hofstra Law Review, 35(4), Article 1, 1-16. Available at: http://scholarlycommons.law.hofstra.edu/hlr/vol35/iss4/ Quill, E. (2014). Torts In Ireland. Dublin 12, Ireland, IR: Gill & Macmillan Publishing Company. Thornton, R. G. (2006). Malice/Gross Negligence. Proceedings (Baylor University, Medical Center), 19(4), 417-418. doi:10.1080/08998280.2006.11928212
Solution: Unit 4 Assignment - Citations