Question

Martha was walking down the street when she was suddenly hit on the head by a large frying pan that fell out of the sky. Martha suffered severe head trauma. It was discovered that the frying pan came from a condominium on the 11th floor belonging to Rachel. Rachel had gotten angry at her ruined casserole dish and threw the pan out the window. Which doctrine will best assist Martha in establishing the negligence element of ""breach?""

Answer 1

Martha can establish breach of duty under the doctrine of negligence by demonstrating that Rachel's act of throwing a frying pan from an 11th-floor window fell below the legally required standard of care. The negligence per se doctrine may aid Martha, as Rachel's action likely violates laws meant to protect the public from such hazards.

Step-by-step explanation:

Martha can make use of the doctrine of negligence to establish that Rachel breached her duty of care. In legal terms, breach is established when one's conduct falls below the standard of care outlined by law to protect others against unreasonable risks of harm. In Martha's case, the fact that Rachel threw a frying pan out of the window from an 11th-floor condominium is a clear breach of the standard of care, as any reasonable person would understand that throwing objects from a significant height poses a serious risk to those below.

Furthermore, Martha could invoke the negligence per se doctrine since Rachel's actions may be considered in violation of statutes or regulations that prohibit the throwing of objects from buildings, thereby creating a danger to the public. This doctrine implies that an act is negligent because it violates a law or regulation, and it can automatically satisfy the breach element of a negligence claim if the injured party is within the class of persons the statute aims to protect, and the injury is of the type the statute aims to prevent.

Answer 2

Once you have determined the existence of a duty, you must determine whether or not the defendant has breached his duty. A defendant can breach his duty both by acting in a certain manner or by failing to act in a certain manner. That is to say, a defendant can breach his duty either by acting in a manner that violates the reasonable man test, or by not acting in a situation where he is legally required to act.

That being said, the accident could've been avoided if Rachel had not gotten angry and thrown the frying pan out of the window. She failed to act properly.