Foreseeable Harms - Who Is Responsible?

1.Who is required to show reasonable care to avoid injury to Mrs. Zhou?

a. the grocery store clerk. As a clerk, he should has the responsibility to keep customers’ safe. Whereas, he is not a reasonable person, causing Mrs. Zhou suffer from aching pain. A reasonable person would act, by showing reasonable care to avoid reasonably foreseeable harms to others which is about the premises liability. In this case, he should be adulating. It is reasonable foreseeable that there is a mess on the floor next to the banana. Whereas, he is a laid-back person, taking his time and do nothing. In the end, the woeful accident happens then.

b. young boy’s mother. As a parent, she should teach boy to behavior in a wary way. It is reasonable foreseeable that the naughty boy mighty cause the reasonably foreseeable harms. She is supposed to realize it before the woeful accident. However, she just pays most attention on what she is doing, neglecting her young baby. The woeful accident happens then.

c. another customer. It depends on whether he notices the mess when he run over the bananas with a shopping cart. If he notices without taking any action, then he is required to show reasonable care to avoid injury to Mrs. Zhou. But if he listens to the music and space out there for a moment without notice the mess, he will not be required to show reasonable care to avoid injury to Mrs. Zhou. It is reasonable foreseeable that the mess will trouble other customers and he need to do something prevent the terrible accident. Whereas, he just keeps shopping.

2.Explain what reasonable care would mean for each of those people you identified in the answer to number 1.

The grocery store clerk - he should sweep the floor timely, making it dry as soon as possible. He can also put a notice board on the floor if he has enough time to do it. Because as a reasonable person, he is supposed to act, by showing reasonable care to avoid reasonably foreseeable harms to others which is about the premises liability. It is reasonable foreseeable that there is a mess on the floor next to the banana. He need to do something avoid it. Whereas, he is a laid-back person, taking his time and do nothing. In the end, the woeful accident happens then.

Young boy’s mother – she should look after the boy all the time to prevent the reasonably foreseeable harms. Or maybe she can leave the boy at home and shop by herself. Because as a reasonable person, she is supposed to act, by showing reasonable care to avoid reasonably foreseeable harms to others which is about the premises liability. It is reasonable foreseeable that the naughty boy mighty cause the reasonably foreseeable harms. She is supposed to realize it before the woeful accident. However, she just pays attention what she is doing, neglecting her young baby. The woeful accident happens then.

Another customer—if he notices the mess – he might stand there, keeping the other customer away from the mess, tell the clerk and so forth. It is reasonable foreseeable that the mess will trouble other customers and he need to do something prevent the terrible accident. Whereas, he just keeps shopping.

3.Would it make any difference in deciding who might be liable for Mrs. Zhou's injury if you learned that the little boy's mother only turned her head away from the little boy for a few seconds in order to pick up some fruit, and during those few seconds he threw the bananas on the floor? EXPLAIN YOUR ANSWER.

Yes, it can make difference in deciding. The reason why boy’s mother go to mall is that she wants to buy something like the fruit. So she turns her head away from the little especially for a few seconds is an unavoidable action. It is first level – do nothing. So, I believe that the mom will not be liable.

4. Assume for this question, but only this question, that only a few seconds passed between the time the boy threw down the bananas on the floor and the first store employee saying Hey, there is a mess on the floor next to the bananas. Better clean it up." Assume, also only for this question, that Mrs. Zhou stepped on the bananas only a few seconds after that. How do those two assumptions affect who or what is liable for Mrs. Zhou's accident? EXPLAIN YOUR ANSWER.

No, it doesn’t. the clerk can said watch out in a loud voice. So that Mrs. Zhou can hear it without stepping on the mess. It is about the balance, one side is the cost to avoid dangerous, another side is the cost of dangerous. The cost of dangerous is that Mrs. Zhou falls down and the cost to avoid dangerous he can shout out a warning which will make sense even if there only have a few seconds, time makes different. All in all, the cost to avoid dangerous is much less than the cost of dangerous, so the clerk is liable. What’s more, it is the third level in three levels – must do everything to keep the customer safe.

5. Would it make any difference in deciding if the store were liable if the store could prove it had instructed its employees to inspect every aisle every five minutes, and in fact the employees failed to do so? Why or why not? EXPLAIN YOUR ANSWER.

Yes, the store are liable. The employer hires the employee. The employer has the responsibility to the employee. When the employee makes the mistake, the store should take responsibility because it is the employer’s fault because of poor overseeing. In this case, the employee fails to inspect every aisle every five minutes, so the store should take the responsibility to that woeful accident.

OUESTION SET TWO

6.Is it possible that someone in this story could be found liable for John Jones injuries?  Who?  Could all of them be liable? EXPLAIN YUR ANSWER.

Li and Ma their joint liability. It is foreseeable for Li and Ma that the sand can cause harm to others. But they do not take any action to avoid it. They could have played in an isolated area. Actually, they not. What cause the woeful accident. In terms of the balance, the cost to avoid the dangerous which means that played in an isolated area is much less than the cost to dangerous – John’s XXX pain.