'Negligence Essay Essay\r'

'Mark sued a jargon for injuries. He was not salaried anxiety as he entered the avow because he was looking at his phone. And he fell suffering $10,000 in injuries. precedent to the f only, the janitor had buffed the floor. The janitor had an IQ of 70. Normally, the janitor was closely supervised. However, today his double-decker was extremely tired, and the manager didn’t give away that the janitor had carelessly used way similarly much floor wax that was extremely slippery. Is the bank likely for the janitor’s sloppiness (be sure to go through all the elements. Additionally, note that downstairs the doctrine of respondeat top-hole the bank WILL be liable for any potential negligence of the janitor employee)? What defenses provide the bank assert? Assume that the jurisdiction does not avow assumption of fortune or contributory negligence. The jurisdiction does recognize the defense of comparative negligence. In enounce to title a negligence film a so mebody must scratch line show that the defendant had to have acted a certain way toward the plaintiff. Second that the defendant failed to act in a sane manner.\r\nFinally, the plaintiff must show they suffered tangible damages or freeing out-of-pocket to the unreasonable doings. Negligence is a behavior or conduct creates an unreasonable misfortune or harm to others. The bank leave behind be prudent for the janitor’s negligence. The janitor is considered an employee of the bank. Therefore, under the doctrine of repondeat superior the bank is responsible for the negligent actions of the janitor. Repondeant Superior, states that the employee is liable for the actions of an employee when the actions take moorage within the scope of employment. This gives a person injured in a perplex of business a better chance of recovering damages, In this causal agent the employer is considered the pencil lead and the employee the agent.\r\nUnder respondent superior the psyc he has control over the agents’ behavior and must take right for the agents’ actions. In this case the bank must take responsibility of the janitor. The bank could debate that Mark contributed to the smoo hence for not paying attention to his purlieu by paying more attention to his prison cell phone than to where he was walking. They could argue that if he had not been on his cell phone he would noticed the showy slippery floors. This is called Contributory Negligence, but the courts do not recognize this defense. Mark could then go for his damages or loss under Comparative Negligence. Meaning he could do one of the two things: 1.) he could have all his damages amount and then reduced by what would be his negligence in the matter or 2.) The courts could say he can’t recover anything if they find that he was upright as negligence as the bank or janitor.\r\n'