Essay Example: Negligence Requirements and Potential Defenses to Myra's Claim

Negligence is a very common topic in people's lives, as well as the rule of law. Negligence happens when parties tasked to perform certain responsibilities fail to properly take care of their duties. In the law of torts, accusations of negligence occur when a party fails to properly take care of things hence causing damages to other parties, as seen in the CARDWARE modeling event at Easton Hotel. Myra, the plaintiff, decides to sue Candie and the HARDWARE company for negligence that resulted in her breaking her nose and having cuts on her face because Candie fell over the judges' table. Candie's fall was due to the wrinkle on the carpet that caught her shoe. Therefore, it is essential to understand the elements of negligence involved in this scenario and potential defenses for Candie and CARDWARE.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Order now

There are three main requirements for negligence. These requirements are duty, breach, and causation. The duty element states that everybody owes everyone general duty of due care to avoid subjecting others to unreasonable harmful risks. It further emphasizes that businesses have a high duty of care than individuals. A breach happens when a certain party is doing, leading to damage that must not have happened. Causation element has two types that are the actual and proximate causations, and both must be contained. The actual refers to the factual cause of the occurrence, while proximate cause refers to the legal cause.

In the CARDWARE case, two businesses are involved that is the Easton hotel and CARDWARE. The two business have a duty of due of care to everyone that attended the business. However, it seems that Easton hotel failed to fulfill this duty because it deeds not notice the wrinkle on the carpet. Secondly, CARDWARE also failed to inspect the carpet and ensure the wrinkle did not exist for the sake model's safety. Myra accusations also have the element of breach. Finally, the plaintiff accusation also meets the threshold of causation. The actual causation is the small wrinkle on the carpet when the proximate cause is Candie; the defendant is the direct cause of plaintiff fracture and injuries.

One of the defenses that both Candie and CALDWARE put across is the assumption of the risk. The two parties should emphasize that Myra, who is the plaintiff, assumed the risk of possible damages and injuries upon agreeing to attend the event. Myra was aware of risks, and he voluntarily and knowingly agreed to attend the modeling event and become a judge. Therefore, the plaintiff is unable to recover the damages that occurred to her.

In conclusion, the plaintiff's accusation meets all three elements of negligence. There is a strong presence of the duty and the causation elements. Therefore, the best defense for the defendants is the assumption of the risk. That is the most appropriate defense for CALDWARE and Candie. it will be difficult to make persuasive arguments with contributory negligence and comparative negligence.