Gm520 Hw 3

GM520

Week 3 Home Work

Ahed Alhamadeen

Q6 Page 313

  Mae Tom went to Kresge’s store on November 15, 1977, slipped, and fell on a clear substance on the floor. No one ever determined what the substance was, but Kresge’s did sell soft drinks in the store, and customers could walk around with their drinks. Ms. Tom wishes to recover for her injuries. Can she do so? [Tom v S. S. Kresge Co., Inc., 633 P.2d 439 (Ariz. App. 1981)].

It’s clear that our case comes under negligence category, to start discussing the case; I would like to talk about negligence in general. Then I will apply the elements for negligence to our case and explain each of them, after that I will talk about defenses to negligence, then finally I will try to give my expectation about what going to happen with the case.

The tort of negligence is one that applies in a variety of circumstances, but it is always used when the conduct of one party did not live up to a certain minimal standard of care we are all expected to use in driving, in our work, and in the care of our property. Negligence imposes liability on us when we are careless.

Element #1 (DUTY)

In our case it was the duty of the Kresge store management to make sure that the store has a clean and dry floor for the customers to walk on, by keep the eye on the floor and hire somebody for cleaning purposes, As we read Kresge store allowed customers to walk in the store with open drinks which is sometimes will cause a wet floor if a customer spill his drink on the floor as a result of this, there is possibility that somebody will fall down. This is a clear example of the first element of negligence.

Element#2(Breach of Duty)

After we explain the first element we can conclude that there is a breach of duty and Kresge failed the duty of keeping the floor dry and safe for walking, by hiring employee or at least give a warning, that’s why the customer fall down, so we can say that Kresge’s store was...