Tort liability in a restaurant meal ordering scenario

Torts

What torts are present in the scenario?

In the scenario with Phyllis there are several different kinds of tort that are present. These include: negligent and strict liability tort. Negligent tort is when a person is engaged in carelessness that resulted in bodily, emotional or financial harm. The way that this is affecting Phyllis, is with the restaurant ignoring the fact that she is bleeding profusely. Then, at the hospital the doctor amputated her foot vs. removing the piece of metal from her mouth. ("Types of Torts," 2012)

Strict liability tort is when the other party can collect damages from a particular activity being dangerous. In Phyllis' situation, she can use this to make a claim against the hospital. This is based on the fact that she is seeking out medical treatment (which is considered to be hazardous). ("Types of Torts," 2012)

Who are the potential plaintiffs and defendants in each tort claim?

The potential defendants in the case include: the restaurant owner, the waiter, the manager and the emergency room doctors. These individuals would be the target of a negligent tort claim that is made against them. The only party that will be subject to a strict liability claim is the hospital. The various plaintiffs include: the waiter, the old man that was trampled and Phyllis. These different elements are showing which parties will be the subject of possible tort litigation. ("Types of Torts," 2012)

What are the elements of the tort that constitute each plaintiff's claim?

The elements of tort that can be applied to both claims include: the presence of duty, the breach of duty, there was an injury and the breach of duty caused the injury. The presence of duty is when the other party did not take reasonable precautions to protect everyone. In this case, both the restaurant owner and the hospital are guilty of these activities. The breach of duty is when the property owner did not create a safe environment. The restaurant owner allowed this to happen by having a piece of metal in the food. Phyllis was bleeding profusely from biting down on the metal. At the same time, an old man was trampled in a fire. The breach of duty is when there is link between the responsibility of the plaintiff and the injury. Both the hospital and the restaurant are in violation of these provisions by allowing these injuries to occur from their actions. ("What are the Four Elements of Tort," 2012)

What are possible defenses each defendant might assert?

Some possible defenses that might be used include: the defendant planted the metal into the food and fire / safety record of the facility. These factors will be utilized to try and discredit any kind of claims that are made the by the plaintiffs.

How you think each claim will be resolved, including a brief discussion of the types of damages that might be awarded.