INDIVIDUAL WRITING PROJECT (50 points) Please prepare an inter-office Research M
ID: 339279 • Letter: I
Question
INDIVIDUAL WRITING PROJECT (50 points) Please prepare an inter-office Research Memorandum, including outline and draft on the following scenario. Facts: Our client, Mars Grocery Store, Inc. is being sued for negligence/premise liability by Sally Thompson, a store patron. Ms. Thompson went to Mars on December 4, 2016 to purchase groceries. While she was in the produce section of the store, Ms. Thompson slipped in a puddle of water that was on the floor and fell. Another patron in the store at the time, Debra Smith, came to help Ms. Thompson. Ms. Smith reportedly stated to our client that she told a store employee about 10 minutes before the fall that there was a large puddle of water on the floor in the produce section. The employee, named John, told Ms. Smith that he would clean it up right away. The employee was coming back with a bucket and mop right as Ms. Thompson fell. Ms. Thompson sustained a broken ankle as a result of the fall. Please research Mars’ liability to Ms. Thompson for her injuries under a theory of negligence/premise liability under Maryland law, include in your memo any potential defenses of the store against Ms. Thompson’s claim.
Explanation / Answer
Property proprietors (or non-proprietor inhabitants) have a duty to keep up a generally safe condition with the goal that individuals who go onto the property don't endure damage. This obligation is known as "premises risk," which holds property proprietors and inhabitants at risk for mishaps and wounds that happen on their property. The sorts of occurrences that may bring about premises risk cases can run from a slip and fall on an open walkway to damage. Like, for this situation, sally thampson sue the mars grocery inc. due to her physical damage caused because of the carelessness of the worker.
All together for an offended party to win a claim for carelessness, he or she should demonstrate the majority of the "components." For example, one of the components is "harms," which means the offended party more likely than not endured harms (wounds, misfortune, and so on.) all together for the litigant to be held at risk. Along these lines, regardless of whether you can demonstrate that the litigant was careless, you may not be fruitful in your carelessness claim if that carelessness caused you no damage.
It's insufficient for an offended party to demonstrate that the litigant owed him or her or an obligation; the offended party should likewise demonstrate that the respondent ruptured his or obligation to the offended party. A litigant breaks such an obligation by neglecting to practice sensible care in satisfying the obligation. Moreover for this situation as opposed to griping once, store representative took 10 minutes to clean the floor. as I would see it sally can sue the mars grocery inc.