Sample Critical Thinking On “Business Law”

The case under study is attributed to the aspect of unintentional torts or universally known as negligence. Negligence happens when a plaintiff is lawfully injured because of the failure of the defendant’s to exhibit the requisite reasonable standards of concern, which end up causing a predictable risk of harm. I take the position of the plaintiff.
The aspect of observance of the standard care by the plaintiff was not attained since, the witness gave a deposition that, and he had informed the cashiers of the impending slippery substance 3-4 minutes before Fred fall down. A deposition refers to the swearing of a witness out of court evidence. The primary function of the deposition is to collect information, which form part of the discovery process. It can be used in court trial process. In this case, the fact that the deponent had reported to the relevant authority and he has given proof, then defendant should bear the burden of duty of care and breach. In addition, the fact that the fall attributed to the slippery substance form both the actual and proximate cause of the injury (Roger and Jentz, 116).
I dispute the answers given by Defendant FB Grocery during the interrogatory process. The interrogatory process refers to the process through which the defendant gives replies to the plaintiff’s claims. Despite the defendant asserting that he had fully met the standards of duty and breach and care, the duration of 15 minutes is far much longer for a place where numerous people pass. I assert that, the aisles were to be dried at least within every 8 minutes; this is a standard requisite of the duty and breach of care.
The total loss attributed to the injury adds up to $ 10, 670. Adding the projected future surgery expenditure of $32, 000, the total will amount to $42, 670. The cost of the legal process and disturbance brings the total amount to the settlement demanded of $47, 500. This amount is reasonable bearing in mind the extent of harm the injury caused and the subsequent pains that the plaintiff will continue to experience, which may end up to a surgery process.
Since there is a suffered a legal injury, the plaintiff should recover 80% of the total settlement demand of $ 47, 500. This translates to $ 38,000. This will be a fair judgment, as it would have considered all the facts that surround this case. Application of the material factual evidence is the best way to do justice in this case.

Work Cited

Miller, Roger L. R, and Gaylord A. Jentz. Business Law Today. St. Paul: West Pub. Co, 1988. Print.