Reference no: EM133192078 , Length: 3 pages
Background: With some understanding of the legal system, the Viral Clean ("Clean") owners can now shift their focus to examining specific areas of law that create potential risks and liabilities for their business. The group knows from their business experience that companies face severe and costly risks and legal liabilities stemming from tort law.
Unintentional harm resulting from accidents, such as negligence, can result in costly litigation. The Clean owners are concerned about the possibility of accidents resulting in injuries to their employees that could occur during cleaning clients' property.
Winnie and Ralph have given you the responsibility of analyzing and summarizing potential negligence claims and liability that Clean might face in its business operations. You decide to analyze a hypothetical fact scenario to present to the Clean owners to help explain Clean's potential negligence liability for accidents occurring on clients' property during cleaning. The analysis will be presented at the next meeting with Clean's owners and TLG. Your analysis will address only the tort of negligence.
Background Facts You Need To Know: Jack, a Clean employee, was assigned to clean and disinfect Client A's office building. Jack's first task was to vacuum the floors in a wide hallway. Jack plugged Clean's commercial vacuum cleaner into the hallway outlet with an extra-long electrical cord and began vacuuming. Before beginning vacuuming, Jack checked to ensure that the hallway was clear of obstacles and people walking. After checking the hall, he placed the cord to the side of the hallway out of the path of his pushing the vacuum. After vacuuming for a few minutes, Jack stepped to the side to turn the vacuum and tripped over two boxes that had been placed in the hallway by Client A's employee since Jack began vacuuming. Jack did not know the boxes had been placed in the hall.
Jack fell and broke his ankle and was taken to the hospital ER via ambulance. A cast was applied after it was determined the ankle did not need surgery. Jack missed three weeks of work because of the injury.
Background/Facts: During a monthly Lunch and Learn Seminar at TLG offices, all TLG business consultants are discussing various client cases. During the discussion of Clean's new business, the group discusses the following questions:
Question 1: What is the difference between the implied warranty of merchantability and the implied warranty of fitness for a particular purpose?
Question 2: Analyze and explain specifically how and why Clean could be sued for breach of implied warranty of merchantability for using EPI cleaning products to clean Clean's clients' commercial property.