Sarah Gramling, an expert in the use of explosives, obtained a city permit to le

Question

Sarah Gramling, an expert in the use of explosives, obtained a city permit to level a ten-story building in the center of town by implosion. The explosives were placed carefully throughout the structure so that it would collapse inwardly and leave a heap of rubble on the site. Unfortunately, for unknown rea- sons, one charge on the third floor caused fragments of brick, concrete, and glass to fly outward. As a re- sult, extensive and costly damage was done to plate glass in nearby buildings and to parked automobiles in the vicinity. There were also personal injuries. Is Gramling liable, even though she acted with a city permit and there was no evidence or claim of negligence?

If Sarah Gramling is liable, what types of damages will she have to pay? Why does the hypothetical not satisfy the elements of negligence?

Explanation / Answer

In order to conclude whether Sarah Gramling can be held liable or not, following points need to be considered:

1. Permission to demolish: In this case, Gramling had obtained a city permit for building implosion. So the required permission was in place.

2. Notifying other stakeholders: It needs to be verified whether Gramling has notified occupier of adjacent buildings, Incharges of the common areas like parking, Electricity/ Water/ Gas supply departments about the exact date of implosion, well in advance. Any lapse here may prove Gramling liable.

3. Arrangements to tackle any mishap: Various safety arrangements need to made before the implosion. These may include shoring up the nearby buildings, weatherproof surfaces of adjacent buildings which may be exposed to implosion, Getting the supply of gas/electricity/water disconnected with the concerned authorities before the implosion. It is required to check whether these points were taken care by Gramling. If there is any lapse here on the side of Gramling, she could be held liable.

4. Insurance: It is important for any party which is undertaking Implosion work to have a proper insurance policy in place. Such a policy would protect the party, clients, the property and public at large. The insurance policy would also require a thorough survey of the work site, which would help in understanding the risks involved. Various policies like Public Liability Insurance, Employer Liability Insurance, Legal expenses insurance and so on. Policies most relevant to the work in question must be taken. In this case, if Gramling had not taken relevant insurance policies, she could be held liable.

5. The correctness of the job itself: It needs to be verified whether the Standard Operating Procedures were followed while doing the implosion job. Such a critical and risky job would have a detailed operating procedure, List of Dos and Donts, List of Precations etc. If there is any deviation in the above points while executing the job, Gramling could be held liable.

To conclude whether Gramling could be held liable or not, the above-mentioned points have to be analysed in detail. After a thorough analysis only, a sound judgement could be made.

In case Gramling is held liable, the damages which she will have to pay would include Compensating the loss to property(both public and private), Loss of life or injuries, Employee compensations, Legal expenses etc. However, most of them could be covered if relevant policies were taken by Gramling.

Elements of negligence can only be considered when the case is analysed in complete detail. In this case, without considering and getting into the details of the 5 points mentioned above, any negligence cannot be concluded.

Related Questions

Navigate

• Browse (All)
• Browse S
• Subjects

Integrity-first tutoring: explanations and feedback only — we do not complete graded work. Learn more.