Premium Essay

Gm597: You Decide

In:

Submitted By ccooper10
Words 842
Pages 4
Coleman works for Software Inc., a Delaware based corporation that sells security equipment to businesses and bars. Coleman travels to prospective clients and meetings with representatives of the businesses in his sales division. Coleman conducted a sales trip to Smalltown, Colorado in March 2008. Coleman saw a ring that he really liked but could not afford it, so he stole the ring. He later went to Jimmy’s Poor-Man’s Bar to meet with a client. Coleman was talking with Jimmy about business when he spilled his drink all over the bar. Colman poured alcohol in his mouth, blew it and it flew across the room and killed Jimmy instantly. The bar sustained a lot of damage. Sofware Inc. fired Coleman with justifying his case. Software Inc.’s handbook required all employees to be interviewed before termination. A week later, Coleman called John to make amends and they instantly got into an argument because John told Coleman he was fat. Coleman punched John in the eye, causing severe eye damage.
Jimmy’s mother, John, and Jimmy’s Poor-Man’s Bar sued Software Inc. for the damage caused by Coleman. Coleman sues Software Inc. for wrongful termination and the jewelry store sued Software Inc. for the value of the ring.
Negligence
Under the common law, negligence requires that a defendant has a duty to avoid the foreseeable risk of injury to a plaintiff, defendant breaches that duty, defendant is the actual and legally proximate cause of plaintiff’s injuries, and plaintiff suffers damages as a consequence of defendant’s actions. Coleman has the duty of care of a reasonable person to avoid injury to John and to the bar, because this is the lowest standard applicable to any person in society. Coleman breaches his duty to avoid foreseeable risk of injury to John and the bar. Coleman is the legally proximate cause of John’s and Bar’s injuries, because the fireball that Coleman

Similar Documents

Free Essay

Gm597 Business Law

...Therese Thomas GM597 Business Law Fall 2010 Week 5 Assignment: You Decide Reading these cases, it is a little bite complicated and hard to decide who should prevail. Being the judge in these cases, I think Kenny’s mother, Kyle, and Kenny’s Poor-Man’s Bar can sue Authorit-I for the damage caused by Cartman. They will prevail because this would be considered as a case of negligence which by law, principals which is Authorit-I would be liable for negligent conduct of agents (Cartman) acting within the scope of their employment. Also when running a motivation test, I think that Authorit-I would also be liable if Cartman’s motivation in committing intentional tort was to promote Authorit-I business, Authorit-I is liable for injuries caused by the tort. If Cartman motivation was personal, Authorit-I would not be liable, even if tort occurs during business hours or on premises. Running a work related test, which is only applied in some jurisdictions. Authorit-I would be liable if Cartman commits intentional tort within a work-related time or space, which it was in this case. As far as Cartman suing his employer for wrongful termination, he will definitely not prevail because after hurting couple people there is no need to interview him even if the employee’s handbook said so. I am sure the State police will before anyone else does. In the case of the Jewelry Store suing Authorit-I I believe it would hard to decide who will win this case. I could said that the Jewelry Store might...

Words: 440 - Pages: 2