Windell Hotels Negligence Case Study

1. Jones will likely not be successful in his negligence lawsuit against Windell Hotels. There are four elements of a negligence claim. These are that the defendant has a legally recognized duty of care to the plaintiff and that there was a breach of that duty (Advanced Business law and the Legal Environment, 2014, pg.223). Also, that there was a relationship between the cause and injury and that there was an actual injury or loss to the plaintiff (Advanced Business law and the Legal Environment, 2014, pg.223-224). Although the hotel did have a legal duty of care, the hotel took precautions by placing a “wet floor” sign in the lobby to warn of the danger. In addition, the floor was wet due to being washed by the maintenance crew, which is a reasonable action. The floor was not overly hazardous and wet due to negligence on the part of the hotel due to some failure of action. Windell Hotels may argue that due to the “wet floor” sign being placed on the lobby floor, that Jones assumed the risk of walking on the floor with the knowledge that the floor was wet.

In forming a general partnership, Fran, Joe, and Mike have unlimited liability. Fran, Joe, and Mike therefore are personally liable for any debts and obligations (The legal and ethical environment of business, 2014, pg. 353). All of the partners are both jointly and severally liable. Fran, Joe, and Mike will all be held liable to Peggy because of the accident caused by Fran which injured Peggy occurred during the ordinary course of Fran making deliveries on behalf of Fresher Flowers. Fresher Flowers will also be held liable. Peggy’s litigation should name Fresher Flowers, Fran, Joe, and Mike as defendants. Due to the joint liability, the assets of Fresher Flowers would have to be exhausted before the individuals personal assets could be used to satisfy liabilities (Clarkson, K., Miller, R., & Cross, F. (2010), pg.