Business Law
jay1996926
pastassignment.zippast assignment/1A2399C3-B4E5-4525-BA17-3497971F1FD9.pdf
Student Individual Preparation Sheet
To be completed before class and submitted via Canvas BEFORE your class starts on Monday, September 27. Please answer all three questions below in 1-2 well-written paragraphs.
Name: _____Kaylie Lyu__________________________________________________
Scenario number you were assigned to: __Paradise is not a port of call ____________________________
1. What legal ground(s) do you think the plaintiff could use? Why do you think the facts support the legal ground(s) you chose? Address all grounds you think could reasonably apply.
The plaintiff could use negligence, misrepresentation and duty of warn to support themselves against the defendant World Cruises. The defendant neglected Covid- 19 alert of WHO and did not warn the passengers immediately about the foreseeable risk. World Cruises did not inform its remaining passengers about the positive cases in Puerto Rico, and did not instruct passengers to isolate despite the issuance of CDC guidance instructing cruise ships to quarantine individuals who had high-risk exposures to the virus. These facts show thr defendant breaches the rule of duty of warn in negligence.
The defendant also did not react to the alert by taking actions to stop Covid-19 to enter or spread in the cruise made the defendant breaching the duty of care. To be more specific, it did not hire any experts to verify that the ship was sufficiently cleaned, and did not refuse boarding to individuals who had Covid-19 symptoms or who had traveled to high risk areas. These facts eventually caused harm to 36 of 75 passengers including the plaintiff.
In addition, claiming to ensure “the highest level of safety for its guests and crewmembers is a misrepresentation, because it is induced by justifiable reliance on the party’s misrepresentation of a material fact, which is a safe trip that the plaintiff bought a ticket for. Especially when contacted by passengers concerned about the Covid-19 virus, World Cruises told the passengers that the ship was safe.
2. What defense(s) do you think the defendant could use? Why?
The defendant could state that they did not breach the duty of warn, because there was no foreseeable risk of harm back in February 26, 2020, when the first Covid-positive passenger boarded since they did not learn of the positive test
until after March 8, 2020. The risk is not open and obvious before March 8. Therefore, it is difficult to warn the potential harm.
3. Which side do you think is most likely to prevail in this lawsuit? Why?
I think the plaintiff side is most likely to prevail in this lawsuit, because it is not a known danger for him get Covid-19 by buying a ticker and boarding on the cruise. The defendant’s negligence caused sufficient physical harm to the plaintiff and almost 50% of the passengers(36 of 75). All of the passengers that in the same situation of the plaintiff was exposed in high risk and some of them got injured because of the misleading information that the ship is safe and lack of duty of care when the defendant did not instruct passengers to quarantine even it knew the circumstance of individuals with Covid-19 symptoms.
