WK-4-A-1 Text Book title Managers and the Legal Environment ISBN: 9781285860374
ID: 1227820 • Letter: W
Question
WK-4-A-1
Text Book title Managers and the Legal Environment
ISBN: 9781285860374
Just remember any time you identify a legal claim in the discussions or in the written assignments, you will need to identify their elements (what elements must the plaintiff prove to win at trial).
Explain the best solution to each. Include comments related to any ethical issues that arise. You should try to locate at least one scholarly source or one case that has been decided or is currently pending to support your answer. APA format and citation
Scenario 2—LLC Liability
Plaintiffs Allen and Monica Thomas were injured by lead paint while living in a house owned by Innovative Homes, LLC. The plaintiffs sued Bill Ding, a member of the LLC at the time it owned the property, alleging that he was liable for their injuries. Ding had limited involvement with the property. He has never visited the property, and neither he nor the LLC was aware that the plaintiffs were occupying the property until after the LLC acquired it. Once they realized this fact, they took legal action to have the plaintiffs removed. The applicable housing code imposes liability on any individual who "owns, holds, or controls" the title to the property.
Is Ding liable for the plaintiffs' injuries?
What are the policy arguments in favor of both parties?
Explanation / Answer
A) THE ELEMENTS USED BY PLAINTIFF TO WIN AT TRIAL:-
An important concept related to elements is that a pliantiff(the injured party) fails to prove any one element of his claim,he loses on the entire claim.Each element must be proven, if the plaintiff proves only three of the four elements , the plaintiff has not succeeded in making out his claim.Following are the elements:-
1) DUTY OF CARE
It involves adherence to a standard of reasonable care while performing any acts that could forseeably harm others. The first step is to look to see whether or not the defendant owned the plaintiff a legal duty of care. For instance , a doctor owes a patient a legal duty to provide him o her with complete medical care. Or the defendant may owe the plaintiff a legal duty to act with reasonable care in certain situation- to expect from one to opertae motor vehicle properly with due care.
For example : The case of Donoghue v.Stevenson illustrates the law of negligence. The persuer May Donoghue, drank beer givem bby a friend and it was supplied by David Stevenson while drinking Donoghue discovered the remains of decomposed snail in the beer. She sued Stevenson. As there was no contract the doctrine of privity prevented a direct action against Stevenson.
2) BREACH OF DUTY
Next , the court will look to see whether the defendant breached this duty by doing or not doing that a "reasonably prudent person" would do under similar circumstances where the term prudent person refers to a legal standard that represents how the average person would responsibly act in a certain situation.
For example : Miss Stone was struck on the head by a cricket ball outside her house. Although she was injured the court held that she didnt have a legitimate claim because the danger was not sufficiently foreseeable. As stated in the opinion 'REASONABLE RISK' cant be judged with the benefit of insight.
3) CAUSATION
It requires that a plaintiff show that the defendant's negligence actually caused his or her injury. Sure, someone might be acting negligently, but the plaintiff can only recover if this negligence somehow causes the injury. For e.g, it wouldn't be fair to sue someone who was negligently texting and driving for a totally unrelated fender bender that happened just across the street.
Another aspect of this element looks at whether the defendant could reasonably have forseen that his or her actions might cause an injury.
4) DAMAGES
The fnal element is damages. This element requires that the court be able to compensate the plaintiff for hisnor her inury-usually through monetary compensation for expenses such as medical care or property repair.
B) LLC LIABILITY:-
To decide this case, we must interpret the Housing Code and determine whether Respondent could be held individually liable for Petitioners’ alleged injuries. The parties agree that respondent were a member of hard assets when they owned the property.The parties also agreed that hard assets owned the property for some time when petitioners lived there.Respondent argues, they cnt be held liable for petitioners alleged injuries because he has no personal liability for those injuries and he owned no duty to petiioners.Thus, the trial court and court of special appeals held that respondents were not laible. BUT IT CNT BE TRUE ALSO because as respondents could eb held liable for petitioners inhuries because as a reason of fact he was owner of that property and as per the Housing Code he personally committed , inspired or participated in the tort alleged in this case and thus would be liable under principles applicable to corporate officers and agents who personally commit, inspire, or participate in the torts in name of corporation. .
Although the Housing Code was silent on the liability of LLC members while expressely providing that a corporation's violation shall be deemed to be the violation of individual directors, officers or agents who authorized , ordered or performed at of the acts , the court did not view the omission of LLCs from the ordinence to exclud LLC members from personal liability.
Related Questions
Navigate
Integrity-first tutoring: explanations and feedback only — we do not complete graded work. Learn more.