Phillip was waiting for a bus at a bus stop. Across the street and down the...

Phillip was waiting for a bus at a bus stop. Across the street and down the block, a mechanic negligently overinflated a tire he was intending to put onto Marsha’s pickup truck. The exploding tire injured Marsha and frightened a neighborhood dog, which ran down the street and knocked Phillip down, injuring his knee. Phillip sued the mechanic. In applying the Palsgraf v. Long Island Railroad Co. decision to this case, explain in detail why or why not the mechanic would be liable and provide a thorough analysis. Make sure to apply the facts of this situation to the Negligence Analysis as well with particular focus on the Palsgraf application.

Expert Solution

ANSWER:

For this situation Phillip would lose in light of the fact that the mechanic couldn't have predicted the injury to philip.mechanicThe doesn't owe an obligation of care to Philip as he was far away and the injury was not sensibly predictable by Philip.A respondent can not be held subject for a physical issue that can not be sensibly foreseen.A litigant owes an obligation of care to the individuals who are inside the sensibly predictable zone of danger.Here,philip was not inside the predictable zone of risk as he was far away over the street.So,Philip would lose .
So as to demonstrate proximate reason in carelessness claim, the injury to the offended party ought to be predictable to the litigant. On the off chance that the damage isn't predictable, there is no obligation of care towards the offended party. Here while carelessly over-blowing up the tire, Marsha could predict the damage that may happen to the individuals around him. Be that as it may, Phillip was at the bus station and Marsha was available over the road and down the square. The injury to Phillip through the pit bulls isn't predictable to Marsha.
Subsequently Mike doesn't owe an obligation of care towards Phillip and Phillip would lose. Marsha has the information on peril he was making for the individuals close to him yet not for Phillip. The proprietor isn't obligated for the wounds brought about by residential creatures like pooch on the off chance that he was not careless in taking care of the creature. Pit bull is a risky canine yet the mutts were liberated because of tire blast and not because of carelessness. Phillip can't win dependent on severe risk for strolling pit bulls. Marsha's protection isn't a factor in deciding obligation for carelessness.

PLEASE UPVOTE.

Rahul Sunny answered 6 months ago

The discrete random variable X is the number of passengers waiting at a bus stop. The...

The discrete random variable X is the number of passengers waiting at a bus stop. The table below shows the probability distribution for X. What is the expected value E(X) for this distribution? X 0 1 2 3 Total P(X) .20 .40 .30 .10 1.00 Answer the following questions using the given probability distribution. Expected value E(X) of the number of passengers waiting at the bus stop. Probability that there is at least 1 passenger at the bus stop. Probability...

Lisa is at a bus stop. The times between successive bus arrivals are independent and identically...

Lisa is at a bus stop. The times between successive bus arrivals are independent and identically distributed exponential random variables with mean 3 minutes. While lisa is waiting, Mindy calls to say she will arrive in exactly 3 minutes. Lisa will wait for Mindy and they will ride a bus together. Calculate the probability that Lisa will miss the first and both Lisa and Mindy will catch the second bus.

A bus company official claims that the mean waiting time for a bus during peak hours...

A bus company official claims that the mean waiting time for a bus during peak hours is less than 10 minutes. Karen took a bus during peak hours on 18 different occasions. Her mean waiting time was 9.1 minutes with a standard deviation of 2.1 minutes. At the 0.05 significance level, test the claim that the mean waiting time is less than 10 minutes by providing each of the following: a. the null and alternative hypothesis b. the test statistic...

The Metropolitan Bus Company claims that the mean waiting time for a bus during rush hour...

The Metropolitan Bus Company claims that the mean waiting time for a bus during rush hour is less than 10 minutes. A random sample of 20 waiting times has a mean of 8.6 minutes with a sample standard deviation of 2.1 minutes. At ? = 0.01, test the bus company's claim. Assume the distribution is normally distributed. - critical value z0 = -2.326; standardized test statistic ? -2.981; reject H0; There is sufficient evidence to support the Metropolitan Bus Company's...

1) a) A public bus company official claims that the mean waiting time for bus number...

1) a) A public bus company official claims that the mean waiting time for bus number 14 during peak hours is less than 10 minutes. Karen took bus number 14 during peak hours on 18 different occasions. Her mean waiting time was 8.2 minutes with a standard deviation of 1.6 minutes. At the 0.01 significance level, test the claim that the mean waiting time is less than 10 minutes. Use the traditional (rejection region) method of testing. b) Use the...

The number of minutes between successive bus arrivals at Mehmet's bus stop is exponentially distributed with...

The number of minutes between successive bus arrivals at Mehmet's bus stop is exponentially distributed with unknown parameter . Mehmet's prior information regarding (real valued, i.e., a continuous random variable) can be summarized as a continuous uniform PDF in the range from 0 to 0.57. Mehmet has recorded his bus waiting times for three days. These are 26, 11, and 25 minutes. Assume that Mehmet's bus waiting times in different days are independent. Compute the MAP (maximum a posteriori probability) rule...

The number of minutes between successive bus arrivals at NewYork's bus stop is exponentially distributed with...

The number of minutes between successive bus arrivals at NewYork's bus stop is exponentially distributed with unknown parameter lambda. John's prior information regarding lambda (real valued, i.e., a continuous random variable) can be summarized as a continuous uniform PDF in the range from 0 to 0.85. john has recorded his bus waiting times for three days. These are 13, 19, and 26 minutes. Assume that John's bus waiting times in different days are independent. Compute the MAP (maximum a posteriori...

Bus waiting time is uniformly distributed with the shortest and the longest waiting times being 7...

Bus waiting time is uniformly distributed with the shortest and the longest waiting times being 7 and 38 minutes respectively. What is the standard deviation of the average waiting time of 57 passenger

A public bus company official claims that the mean waiting time for bus number 14 during...

A public bus company official claims that the mean waiting time for bus number 14 during peak hours is less than 10 minutes. Karen took bus number 14 during peek hours on 18 different occasions. Her mean waiting time was 7.6 minutes with a standard deviation of 2.3 minutes. At the 0.01 significance level, test the claim that the mean waiting time is less than 10 minutes. Use the P-value method of testing hypotheses.

Suppose that the waiting time for a bus is normally distributed with a mean of 5...

Suppose that the waiting time for a bus is normally distributed with a mean of 5 minutes and a standard deviation of 2.5 minutes. (a) Find the probability that the waiting time for the bus is between 3 minutes and 7 minutes. (b) If you randomly choose 4 passengers, find the sampling distribution of their average waiting time. Please indicate shape, mean and standard deviation. (c) For the randomly selected 4 passengers, find the probability that their average waiting time...

Question