EMR Paper
LAW/531
October 3, 2011
Rachel Compton

Tort Violation
Upon reviewing the simulation it is evident Kelly Bates and The Erehwon Reporter were negligent in the publishing of the article claiming Alumina incorporated repeatedly contaminated the waters of Lake Dira. According to Cheeseman (2010), “under the doctrine of unintentional tort, commonly referred to as negligence, a person is liable for harm that is the foreseeable consequence of his or her actions” (p. 80). For instance, when Kelly Bates and The Erehwon Reporter decided to publish the article disparaging the name of Alumina Incorporated they became legally responsible for litigation that resulted from the article getting published. Kelly Bates and The Erehwon Reporter were especially liable for disparagement or trade libel. According to Cheeseman, “business firms rely on their reputation and the quality of their products and services to attract and keep customers. That is why sate unfair-competition laws protect business from disparaging statements made by competitors and others” (p.79). Even though Alumina Incorporated was responsible for violating the Clean Water Act five years earlier, there was no supporting evidence for Kelly Bates claim that the company repeatedly contaminated Lake Dira without restraint. Furthermore, Kelly Bates allegations that Alumina Incorporated exclusively contaminated Lake Dira and caused her daughters leukemia were unjustified. Kelly Bates intention was to use The Erehwon Reporter for help to hold Alumina Incorporated responsible for the cause of her daughters’ leukemia. However, Kelly Bate breeched her duty of care by making disparaging statements about Alumina Incorporated in the news article. Cheesman defines duty of care as “a failure to act as a reasonable person would act” (p. 81). Kelly Bates failed to act rational by defaming the Alumina name and brand