Week 5 Discussion Peer Responses
docx
keyboard_arrow_up
School
Seton Hall University *
*We aren’t endorsed by this school
Course
6008
Subject
Law
Date
Jan 9, 2024
Type
docx
Pages
2
Uploaded by AdmiralWillpowerSeahorse20
Discussion Question 1 Matthew, You clearly explained how the loss of liability waivers would not protect businesses but rather the consumer. Liability waivers are put in place to lower the consumer’s chances of suing for compensation of their injuries. Without waivers, consumers are more likely to come forward to the courts with their grievances that they experienced from negligent companies. I personally think that consumers should only receive compensation where it is due. I believe this statute would unintentionally open the door for people to sue for illegitimate reasons. Some may go as far to purposefully injure themselves in order to file a lawsuit with the hopes of receiving a check. It is very important for state legislators to consider this consequence because this statute could cause a huge strain on businesses and the legal system. Many successful businesses may not be able to financially sustain themselves if they are hit with multiple negligence liability lawsuits at once. Do you think our economy would be disrupted by this? Gennifer, Great discussion post. The information that you provided about our home state New Jersey was informative. I agree that deeming liability waivers invalid would not be a smart choice. However, it seems
that you came to this conclusion with a different reason than I did. You found that liability waivers offer protection for the consumer, which was the basis of your argument against the statute. I do not find this necessarily true. I think liability waivers are actually implemented by companies with the intention to primarily protect themselves. Ultimately, waivers protect companies from lawsuits and a loss in profits. I do not find this to be in the public’s best interest. Despite this, I would argue against the statute because it would cause too much financial strain on businesses. Also, the absence of liability waivers could encourage the public to file random negligence lawsuits just because they want a payout. Discussion Question 2
Ciera, You explained the difference between the contributory negligence approach and the comparative negligence approach very well. We both seem to agree that the comparative negligence approach is better because it is fair. This approach recognizes that negligence is not always one sided. I disagreed with the contributory negligence approach because it only benefits the companies who are being sued. If the plaintiffs are found guilty of negligence in any way, their entire case is dropped, which saves the company’s time and money. You considered the courts not accurately measuring the negligence of each party as an advantage of the contributory negligence approach. I would not necessarily consider this an advantage. Ultimately, it should be the court’s job to fully consider how each party may have been negligent in every case. I personally think anything less than that not only promotes injustice in our legal system but completely negates the purpose of bringing negligence claims to the court in the first place. Natalia,
You did a great job on your discussion post. I agree with you that the comparative negligence approach is
the best choice because it’s truly fair. This approach eliminates the plaintiffs’ fear of being disregarded by
the court if they are found partially negligent. I think the contributory negligence approach is lazy on the courts’ part because they do not have to determine each party’s blame. The comparative negligence approach fully acknowledges the plaintiff’s claims, which is just. This approach also does not consider either party solely responsible in negligence liability cases. The plaintiffs’ compensation will be reduced based on how negligent they were, which is fair to the defendants. With the comparative negligence approach, the defendants do not have to worry about facing the brunt of the financial burden if the plaintiff also acted wrongfully. While this approach may require more effort from the courts, I think that comparative negligence is fair for everyone.
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help