Ricky works at the local Alamo Freeze, which is Texas’ version of “Dairy Queen”.

Question

Ricky works at the local Alamo Freeze, which is Texas’ version of “Dairy Queen”. A new Texas state law was recently passed that said that all ice cream shops must provide a “blocker” on the soft ice cream dispensers so the employees cannot be harmed if too much ice cream shoots out of the dispenser at one time. Jason is Ricky’s friend and Ricky invites Jason to the store. Jason was so excited that he ran to the store and immediately went into the back where Ricky was making an ice cream cone. When Ricky looked up and saw Jason, the ice cream kept dispensing and went all over the floor causing Ricky to slip and fall and then Jason to slip and fall when he went over to help Ricky. It turned out that Alamo Freeze never put the “blocker” on the soft ice cream dispenser. Ricky and Jason immediately sued Alamo Freeze for their injuries. In their lawsuit, the court found Alamo Freeze to be “negligent per se” based on the new Texas state law. Under negligence per se, who would Alamo Freeze be liable to and why?

2.         Ang went to Red Robin’s for a burger. It was snowing that day and some of the snow was on the floor of Red Robin’s. Most of the snow accumulated by the door and was not visible to incoming patrons. Pat, the manager of Red Robin’s, knew about the snow and was in the process of writing up a “wet floor” warning sign when Ang entered Red Robin’s and slipped and fell on the wet floor. She injured her back and subsequently sued Red Robin’s for negligence. Can Red Robin’s be held liable for negligence in this situation?

3.         Dave was walking down Main Street in Hackettstown, New Jersey looking for lunch. John was also walking through Main Street, as was Riley. None of them knew each other. Hackettstown was particularly crowded and there were people walking on the sidewalk, cars driving in the streets and cyclists riding in the bicycle lane. As Riley was walking, he saw a cyclist, Jim, riding in the bicycle lane heading directly for Dave who was walking in and out of the bicycle lane and the sidewalk. John also saw Jim heading for Dave but decided that he was not going to do anything to prevent Dave from being harmed. Riley was trying to decide what to do and he opted to try to help Dave so he began shouting at the top of his lungs for Dave to watch out for Jim. Dave, who was currently not in the bike lane when Riley started screaming, was startled by Riley’s screams causing him to jump into the bike lane. Jim, who was riding his bike with reasonable care, then ran over Dave causing damage to Dave’s elbow. Dave decided to sue John and Riley for negligence. Assume for the purposes of this question that New Jersey does not have a “Good Samaritan Law”. What is the likely result of Dave’s lawsuit against John and Riley?

4.         Cindy, a restaurant manager, received stitches in her face after a bottle of soda exploded while she was putting it into the restaurant's refrigerator. The soda bottle was part of a delivery from a bottling company that had been sitting under a counter untouched for at least 24 hours after the delivery. There is no evidence that Cindy or anyone else at the restaurant did anything to damage the bottle between its delivery and the explosion. Cindy was left with no recourse except to file a lawsuit against the bottling company. Cindy argues that the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur should apply in her situation. Will Cindy be successful under this theory?

Explanation / Answer

1- Alamo freeze is liable to Ricky as Ricky was the one who got injury from negligence. It is a direct violation of the law that is meant to protect the public. Company should have to pay the damages to Ricky.

2- Yes, Red Robin's can be held liable for the specific situation of negligence as they should have closed the store till the wet floor sign was placed as it was
On the private property of Red Robin's and the manager already knew about specific situation which would be harmful for its customers.

3- there is no good samaritan law present in New Jersey then Riley can be sued for interfering and creating a confusing situation for dave. Dave cannot sue john as he was riding in his Lane and riding with proper awareness. This accident who was not a mistake of John which is considered in the specific case.

4- in this is specific case, reason of the blast for the bottle is not clear as well as conditions which could be involved in the specific blast is also not clear. Soda bottle has very low probability of blasting off at unusual places and due to unavailability of any kind of evidence and delay in delivery of the bottle directly create a favourable position for bottling company hence Cindy would not be successful in the specific case.

Related Questions

Navigate

• Browse (All)
• Browse R
• Subjects

Integrity-first tutoring: explanations and feedback only — we do not complete graded work. Learn more.