Overview In this assignment, you apply contract and product liability law to a business scenario.
Scenario Mowers, Inc., a fictional company, has a flourishing lawn care business. The business has two full-time employees who have been with the company for five years. All employees are trained on using the lawn equipment and, upon being hired, sign a waiver-of-liability contract limiting liability for the company. The owner, Brian, tells his employees, “Not to worry – the company will protect you!”
One employee, Lori, was on the job cutting a lawn. Lori was riding a mower, a Ferrari 2000, which was three years old and in good working condition. The step-up on the mower had writing on it with a warning sticker to replace the sandpaper liner for traction every three years due to normal wear and tear. It was replaced every three years as required.
Lori stepped down off the rider, slipped because of moisture from the grass, and severed her pinky toe on the mower blade. When she fell to the ground, the mower continued through the grass and proceeded by itself to cut and mulch a neighbor’s prize roses. Peta, the neighbor, was preparing for a rose competition with a potential grand prize of $10,000.
Instructions Use FirstPass Draft Review for this assignment, it can help you refine and develop it prior to making your final submission. Use FirstPass at any time even if you do not have a fully completed assignment. The tool is here to offer feedback to guide revisions, helping you refine your work and ensure it aligns with expectations.
Consider the above scenario and write 3–4 pages in which you make the following determinations. Make sure to cite and explain the law for each determination.
Pursuant to contract law requirements, determine whether the waiver of liability signed by Lori is a valid contract and whether verbal assurances by Brian become part of the contract. Support your response. Determine whether Peta, the plaintiff, has a product liability case against the manufacturer for each of the following defects. Support your response. Design. Manufacturing. Failure-to-warn. Determine whether Lori, the employee, has a claim for injuries and whether the employee can recover pain and suffering damages per tort or worker’s compensation law. Support your response. Note:
Remember, you are demonstrating your understanding of the law, so explain the law first and then make your determination. Be informative and show what you know! References should be from credible and reputable legal sources. Requirements 3–4 pages, double-spaced, Times New Roman font (size 12), 1-inch margins on all sides. Include at least three quality references. The textbook for this class is a required source for this assignment. Note: Wikipedia and similar websites do not count as quality references. Include a cover page containing the title of the assignment, the student’s name, the professor’s name, the course title, and the date. The cover page and the Sources list are not included in the required assignment page length. Resources Use the Strayer Library to conduct your research. In addition to your textbook, you have access to Nexus Uni through the Strayer Library. You are encouraged to use the Strayer Library to conduct your research. The textbook for this class is a required source for this assignment. This course requires the use of Strayer Writing Standards (SWS). The library is your home for SWS assistance, including citations and formatting. Please refer to the Library site for all support. Check with your professor for any additional instructions.
The specific course learning outcome associated with this assignment is as follows:
Analyze the legal standing and situation of a specific business to achieve a defined result. Week 5 Assignment Management Liability ScenarioWeek 5 Assignment Management Liability ScenarioCriteriaRatingsPtsCite the most relevant governing law for each question with a plausible explanation of why each is applicable.37.5 to >33.75 ptsExemplaryCited the most relevant governing law for each question with a plausible explanation of why each is applicable.33.75 to >26.25 ptsCompetentCited relevant governing law for each question, but explanations lack plausibility or support.26.25 ptsNeeds ImprovementCited irrelevant governing laws for 1-2 questions or did not explain why each was applicable.26.25 to >0 ptsUnacceptableDid not submit or did not cite the relevant governing law for each question./ 37.5 ptsCorrectly determine whether the waiver of liability signed is a valid contract and whether verbal assurances become part of the written contract. Provide support from a professional legal source.30 to >27 ptsExemplaryCorrectly determined whether the waiver of liability signed is a valid contract and whether verbal assurances become part of the written contract. Provided support from a professional legal source.27 to >21 ptsCompetentCorrectly determined whether the waiver of liability signed is a valid contract and whether verbal assurances become part of the written contract but failed to apply applicable law and support from a reputable professional legal source.21 ptsNeeds ImprovementCorrectly determined whether the waiver of liability signed is a valid contract OR whether verbal assurances become part of the written contract.21 to >0 ptsUnacceptableDid not correctly determine whether the waiver of liability signed is a valid contract OR whether verbal assurances become part of the written contract./ 30 ptsDetermine whether the plaintiff has a viable product liability case against the manufacturer for all specified defects by applying applicable law and support from a reputable professional legal source.37.5 to >33.75 ptsExemplaryDetermined whether the plaintiff has a viable product liability case against the manufacturer for all specified defects by applying applicable law and support from a reputable professional legal source.33.75 to >26.25 ptsCompetentDetermined whether the plaintiff has a viable product liability case against the manufacturer for all specified defects by applying applicable law but provides little or no support from a reputable professional legal source.26.25 ptsNeeds ImprovementIncorrectly determined whether the plaintiff has a viable product liability case against the manufacturer or fails to apply applicable law to a correct determination.26.25 to >0 ptsUnacceptableDid not submit or did not determine whether the plaintiff has a viable product liability case against the manufacturer./ 37.5 ptsDetermine whether the employee has a viable claim for injuries and pain and suffering damages per tort or worker’s compensation law with support from a reputable professional legal source.30 to >27 ptsExemplaryDetermined whether the employee has a viable claim for injuries and pain and suffering damages per tort or worker’s compensation law with support from a reputable professional legal source.27 to >21 ptsCompetentDetermined whether the employee has a viable claim for injuries and pain and suffering damages per tort or worker’s compensation law but provides little support from a reputable professional legal source.21 ptsNeeds ImprovementDetermination is inaccurate as to whether the employee has a viable claim for injuries and pain and suffering damages per tort or worker’s compensation law.21 to >0 ptsUnacceptableDid not submit or did not determine whether the employee has a viable claim./ 30 ptsClarity, writing mechanics, and formatting requirements.15 to >13.5 ptsExemplary0–2 errors present.13.5 to >10.5 ptsCompetent3–4 errors present.10.5 ptsNeeds Improvement5–6 errors present.10.5 to >0 ptsUnacceptableMore than 6 errors present./ 15 ptsTotal Points: 0
