Business Law Assignment

Chapter 6 - Intentional Torts and Business Torts

Watch this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pCkL9UlmCOE (Woman Burned by hot coffee at McDonalds, and then by the News Media).

Answer these questions:

1. Do you believe the Liebeck case against McDonalds was frivolous? Explain
2. What amount did she ultimately receive?
3. Was that amount fair in your view?
4. If you have heard of this case before, do these two resources change what you thought of the case?

Chapter 7- Negligence

1. What is the test that judges use to define the ‘duty of due care' in negligence?
2. When you go into 7-11 to buy a Slurpee, what status are you and what kind of duty does the landlord owe you?
3. What is the name of the legal theory that made the employer liable in this case:

Roger Reagan would be alive today and celebrating Thanksgiving Day with his family if the Dunaway Timber Company had done a background check on its new driver. The driver had no business driving a tractor trailer! You see, Morgan Quisenberry lied on his employment application about having two past license revocations for substance abuse. Dunaway Timber could have learned about these license revocations with a simple background search that took only 15 minutes and cost $15.

Roger Reagan was killed when Quisenberry's tractor trailer went across the center line while taking a curve in the roadway and veered directly into the cab of the semi-truck Reagan was driving.

This deadly crash occurred only 19 days after the driver was hired by Dunaway.

The Plaintiff's attorney argued that, "We all expect trucking companies who send truck drivers out onto the public roads to do so with professional, competent people and then make sure the company trains them and monitors them. But this was an example where a company hired someone who had no business driving a truck in the first place, and then blatantly ignored the regulations that govern the trucking industry."

$7 MILLION is the amount awarded to Roger Reagan's family.

4. What makes "negligence per se" different than regular negligence? (162)

5. When might someone use the doctrine of res ipsa loquitor? (165)

6. Which is more harsh on a plaintiff - contributory negligence or comparative negligence?

7. What defense might the hockey stadium raise if you go to a hockey game and get injured when the puck flies over the guard rail and strikes you in the head? (If you don't know hockey, think of another sport that involves flying objects).

8. If you start a business that uses dynamite to mine for gold, and you work very hard to make it safe, are you still potentially liable for injuries caused by your business? Yes or No, and why?