Get help now

Assignment Samantha Smith

dovnload

Download

  • Pages 2
  • Words 391
  • Views 503
  • Can’t find relevant credible information

    Let our experts help you

    Get help now

    The fifth Defendant is found only 49% at fault or less, the Plaintiff is awarded nothing. Mind. Code Ann. 5 34-11-2-4 Sec. 4. States that “An action for  injury to person or character,  injury to personal property; or  forfeiture of penalty given by statute; must be commenced within two  years after the cause of action accrues.

    Statement of Facts

    Samaritan Smith was shopping at a local grocery store in Indiana a few months ago and had an accident. She slipped and fell on some shampoo that had leaked out of one of the bottles.

    The day Samaritan fell, the employee in charge of the aisle inspection was an older gentleman with glasses. The shampoo on the floor was a clear gel. The store alleges that Samaritan had a duty to avoid the spill in the aisle. The store claims that she is at much as fault as they are. Further, they allege that she was too distracted by her 2-year-old son in the cart, who was misbehaving, to notice the floor.

    Question Presented

    Can Samaritan recover for her injuries under Indiana law? Can the grocery store be liable for Cantata’s injuries under Indiana law?

    Brief Answer

    Ms. Smith can recover but will need many months of physical therapy. Not 100% reliable. Applicable statute- Mind. Code Ann. 5 34-11-2-sec. 4. States that “An action for (1) injury to person or character, (2) injury to personal property; or (3) forfeiture of penalty given by statute; must be commenced within two years after the cause of action accrues

    Discussion

    The Indiana grocery store can deny that they were at fault by saying Ms. Smith was too distracted by her son and could have seen the spill on the floor.

    This brings up a comparative fault that can allow a jury to consider. If Ms. Smith says that she was at part fault, then the jury can find a percentage of fault to go to both parties.

    Conclusion

    The grocery store denies that they are at fault, they can say that she had seen the shampoo, was distracted by her son, and avoided it, it will be tough to argue that case only because it was just checked at 1: app. M. Also we can argue that the spill was clear which is tough to see on the floor and that that looks down while shopping for groceries on the floor.

    Assignment Samantha Smith. (2018, Jul 02). Retrieved from https://graduateway.com/assignment-samantha-smith/

    Hi, my name is Amy 👋

    In case you can't find a relevant example, our professional writers are ready to help you write a unique paper. Just talk to our smart assistant Amy and she'll connect you with the best match.

    Get help with your paper