Viper Den Versus Jim Morriston - Essay Example

Viper’s Den v. Jim Morriston A brief ment of the case This case involves Flash of Viper’s Den and Jim Morristonof Wyoming. Flash was a former lead guitarist of the group that was known as Swords and Satins. He retired and opened a business in Bozeman where he provides performance space to local musicians, offers music lessons and sells musical instruments. There was an incident at the Viper’s Den that saw Jim Morriston sustain serious bodily injuries. There was a coffee spill at one of the hall ways in Viper’s Den that Flash was supposed to deal with so as to avoid anyone from slipping as a result of the coffee and getting injured. Unfortunately, the coffee was not wiped out on time because Flash attended to a phone call before cleaning it up. Jim Morriston was just through with his lunch and had taken two beers with it when he saw Flash and ran over to greet him. Jim Morriston did not see the coffee spill on the floor and neither did he see the bright yellow caution sign that warned of the slippery floor. As he was running towards Flash, he slipped and fell very heavily on the floor as a result of the coffee that had spilled on the floor. As he fell on the floor, he tried to support himself with his hands and ended up fracturing his arm in two places. As a result of this incident, Jim Morriston had to undergo surgery and he ended up spending two days in hospital so that he would be treated of the injuries he sustained from the fall. When Jim Morriston returned to Wyoming, he decided to sue Flash for negligence that led to the fall. A statement of the issues to be decided The major issues that need to be decided include whether or not Flash has to litigate the case in Wyoming. Another major issue is whether Jim Morriston has a legitimate case of negligence over Flash and the Viper’s Den. In the first issue, Jim Morriston has sued Flash in Wyoming for neglect that led to his fall. He has gone to court right after he returned to his area of residence in Wyoming and has claimed the Flash neglected cleaning wiping off the coffee from the floor which resulted to the injuries and distress that he has today. Since the case is already in court in Wyoming, Flash needs to decide whether he has to litigate the case in Wyoming or not. Flash is of the idea that the state courts in Wyoming are not the proper jurisdiction for this particular type of case. He therefore has to decide whether he will proceed to litigate the case in Wyoming or he will challenge that decision made by Jim Morriston to take the case to the state courts at Wyoming. Another issue that needs to be decided is whether Jim Morriston has a legitimate case of negligence over Flash and the Viper’s Den. It has to be decided whether Jim Morriston was the one on the wrong for having taken two beers at lunch. It has to be decided whether the beers that Jim Morriston had taken impaired his sight, reasoning and actions to such an extent that he was not able to see the big bright yellow sign. The coffee spill should have been dealt with immediately so as to avoid any unnecessary accidents from occurring. However, had Jim Morriston been in his right state of mind, there would be higher chances that he would have seen the bright yellow sign and take caution to prevent him from falling. These major issues in this case therefore need to be decided in an attempt to resolve the case and come up with viable and legal solutions to the case at hand (Mallor, Barnes, Bowers & Langvardt, p. 340). Legal arguments that Flash can make against the case being litigated at Wyoming Flash can legally argue that if the reported incident took place in Bozeman, then Jim Morriston should have sued him in a court in Bozeman and not in Wyoming. Flash can argue that he does not do any business in Wyoming and the case would therefore lack objectivity if it was to be heard there. The state courts at Wyoming are not the proper jurisdiction for this type of case. The incident that is being reported tool place in a completely different jurisdiction that is known as Bozeman. The case should therefore be handled in the courts at Bozeman or should be taken to higher courts. It is wrong for a case of this nature to be transferred to a court in another state yet it can be heard in a court that is in the same state that the incident happened. Jim Morriston should have sued Flash in a different jurisdiction, preferably in Bozeman because this was where the incident took place. The law is meant to protect all persons and give them a fair hearing no matter the magnitude of their alleged mistake. Flash has the right to be heard in a court that is in the jurisdiction and also the jurisdiction where the alleged offence is said to have happened (Mallor, Barnes, Bowers & Langvardt, p. 56). A description of the rules of negligence Jim Morriston will have a lot to prove so as to ensure that he wins this case. Jim Morriston has to prove that Flash acted in a manner that showed negligence to his duty. According to common law, negligence involves harm caused to someone or something as a result of carelessness and not intentional harm. Flash did not mean to cause harm to Jim Morriston. He did not intend to injure Jim Morriston or cause him to fall and sustain injuries. The rules of negligence apply in this case because the Flash has been sued by Jim Morriston for apparently being negligent of something he was supposed to do. Also, Flash did not mean to intentionally cause harm to Jim Morriston. The falling of Jim Morriston was purely accidental and had not ill intentions to it. The rules of negligence therefore apply in this case because the case involves someone who was injured as a result of carelessness. The circumstances surrounding the case are unfortunate because it cannot be said to be pure carelessness. Flash did not mean to make Jim Morriston slip and injure himself. It was a case of unfortunate events because Flash had even put up a bright yellow sign warning the people walking by that the floor was slippery and they needed to be cautious. Unfortunately, just before the coffee had been wiped off the floor, Jim Morriston slipped and fell, thus sustaining serious injuries. The elements of negligence here include breach, duty and causation. The factors that caused this accident were not intentional. The incident was an accident that had not been planned for. It took place so fast that it was even difficult to comprehend what had really happened. Arguments I can make in favor of Jim The first argument that I can make in favor of Jim was that it was not his fault to walk past the area where the coffee had spilled. The area was meant for people to walk and it was the fault of the person who had spilled the coffee there, in this case, Joan Jettison. The woman should be held responsible for spilling the coffee but all these changes because Flash promised to clean up the mess after her. Flash should have done so immediately considering the danger that the spilled coffee had on the passersby. Since the area was an open area where many people would walk by, utmost care and caution should have been exercised. Flash knew that he had made the promise to clean up the mess but took a lot of time before doing so. This was carelessness considering the fact that the safety and security of very many individuals was being compromised. Flash should have considered the fact that very many people made use of that area. He should have taken it upon himself to wipe off the spilled coffee immediately so as not to jeopardize the safety of other people. Affirmative defense that Flash and Viper’s Den can raise Flash and Viper’s Den can put up an affirmative defense based on the facts of the case. Flash can defend himself by saying that Jim Morriston was under the influence of alcohol when he slipped and fell. This had several implications, including the fact that Jim Morriston’s thinking and reasoning was affected by the alcohol he had taken. He would have been able to see the bright yellow sign that had been put up to warn people of the slippery floor if he was not under the influence of alcohol. He would also have the ability to exercise caution and avoid running into the area that had been marked as being dangerous. Flash can also put up an affirmative defense by pointing out that he had put up a bright yellow sign to indicate that the place was dangerous and slippery. He should therefore not be held responsible for someone’s fault of not abiding by the bright yellow sign. It was the fault of Jim Morriston for being under the influence of alcohol and for not taking the bright yellow sign seriously. In conclusion, the case was a difficult one to decide. However, Jim Morriston can be said to be the one on the wrong. Had Flash not put up a sign to show that the place was slippery because coffee had spilled there, then he would be the one on the wrong because he took no steps to notify the people passing by that there was a possible danger that came from the coffee spill and so they had to exercise caution so as not to get injured. Flash would therefore win the case because the injury caused by the coffee spill to Jim Morriston was not intentional. I have decided the case in this manner because Flash was in the process of wiping off the coffee immediately after it spilled and he was unable to do so immediately because of the twist of events that took place. However, he had taken precaution and warned the people of the looming danger and was in the process of cleaning it up when the unfortunate accident occurred. Works cited Mallor, J. P., Barnes, J. A., Bowers, L. T. & Langvardt, A. W. Business Law: The Ethical, Global, and E-commerce Environment. New York: McGraw Hill Higher Education. Print Read More