Question

BUS 201 - Business Law

Question 7

George overslept. He got up late, dressed quickly, skipped breakfast, threw on some clothes, and jumped into his car. He was going to be late for work, again! He knew that the brakes on his car needed to be fixed, but he did not have the time nor the money to have the work done until after payday. George was driving on Spring Street, doing 35 mph in a 35 mph zone. Suddenly a little boy dashed out from behind a parked car about 50 feet in front of him. George immediately slammed on the brakes but was unable to stop in time. George hit and injured the little boy. The parents of the little boy sue George for the child’s injuries. Identify the cause of action under which George would liable and using the elements of the cause of action, apply the law (the elements of the cause of action) to the facts of this situation.

Answer 1

1. The legal issues in this case are that there is strong prima facie against George. He has not bothered to replace a fault brake mechanics of the car in which he was driving. Because of non-maintenance of his own car, the accident has taken place. This is only how it looks prima facie.

Another important point to consider is the braking distance required for a car travelling at 35mph. The stopping distance for a car travelling at 35 mph is about 135 feet. Therefore, even if George had maintained the car, it would not have been possible to stop the car. So there is no legal case against George and the fault is with the little boy

2. Here there is indeed a strong case against the hotel. The "soap and grab" had not functioned as required and has resulted in a injury to the guest. The guest in all capacity can sue the hotel and get adequate compensation. The "soap and grab" has to work as specified and this is not the case in the example.