Esposito vs. Davis

Esposito v. Davis

Kaplan University

Esposito v. Davis

This week’s first assignment relates to torts and tort law. Furthermore, terminology such as negligence, duty of care, breach, causation, and injury is also discussed in this paper. Our text defines a tort as “a civil, legal injury to a person or property caused by a breach of legal duty” (Jentz, 2010, p. 80). The facts of the case involving Davis vs. Esposito revolve around unintentional negligence. Negligence occurs when someone suffers injury as a result from failure of another to live up to a duty of care (Jentz, 2010, p. 90). Duty of care is a principle that refers to a person’s right to act as they please as long as it doesn’t infringe on the interests of others (Jentz, 2010, p. 90). Moreover, such duty of care pertains how a reasonable person would act in similar circumstances. Courts also decide on whether a person is held negligent based on risk of foreseeable outcomes. Clearly, Davis didn’t intentionally set out to injure an 80 year old woman, as he wouldn’t necessarily foresee that Esposito would be directly behind him, although a tort (wrong doing) has occurred. On the other hand, as an employee of the production, Davis would have a duty of care to its customers on grounds that he was at the exit of the event as the craft show finished and attendees would reasonably be exiting. Davis’ action breached the duty of care on behalf of the company and did cause injury to Esposito. The production company could argue that it is unreasonable to impose duty on a pedestrian to keep a proper lookout prior to turning around, though the four items that Esposito’s attorneys would need to prove exist. Protecting customers as an employee obstructs access to a building constitutes legal duty.

References

Jentz, R. L. (2010). Fundamentals of Business Law. Mason, OH: South-Western Cengage Learning.