Jurisprudence And Legal Memorandum: Case Study
LS503-01: Jurisprudence and Legal History
Professor Hugo Valverde
Term: October 2014
Unit 3 Legal Memorandum
M e m o r a n d u m
TO: Attorney for Lucky Spoon Cafe
FROM: Dow L Pettis-Paralegal
RE: Shooting Death of Louis Jones
DATE: September 28, 2014
Question Presented
The owner of the café did not allow a non-customer to use the phone, does this mean the owner of the Lucky Spoon Café is negligent in the death of Louis Jones?
Short Answer
The owner of the café is not negligent in the death of Louis Jones. Louis Jones, nor his son Max Jones were customers of the café. They were both across the street at the Happy Jack Saloon, which is across the street from the Lucky Spoon Café.
Statement of Facts
Max alleges that on the date of the shooting of his father, a patron …show more content…
Hall & Upson Co. – Smithwick was told not to work on a platform but was not told that the wall was about to collapse. He worked on platform despite the warning because he believed the risk of falling was the only danger. The court held that the failure to heed a warning is not contributory negligence if the injury was the result of a different source of risk caused by the defendant, and the injured party was unaware of that risk.”
“Solomon v. Shuell – Plain clothes police officers were arresting robbery suspects. The decedent thought the suspects were being attacked and was shot by one of the officers when he came out of his house with a gun. The court held that under the rescue doctrine, contributory negligence is not present if the rescuer had a reasonable belief that the victim was in actual danger.” (http://www.lawnix.com/cases/contributory-negligence.html).
Conclusion
Max Jones, and his father, Louis Jones, were not patrons of the Lucky Spoon Café at the time of the shooting. They were patrons of the Happy Jack Saloon across the street. The Lucky Spoon Café is not negligent in this
Professor Hugo Valverde
Term: October 2014
Unit 3 Legal Memorandum
M e m o r a n d u m
TO: Attorney for Lucky Spoon Cafe
FROM: Dow L Pettis-Paralegal
RE: Shooting Death of Louis Jones
DATE: September 28, 2014
Question Presented
The owner of the café did not allow a non-customer to use the phone, does this mean the owner of the Lucky Spoon Café is negligent in the death of Louis Jones?
Short Answer
The owner of the café is not negligent in the death of Louis Jones. Louis Jones, nor his son Max Jones were customers of the café. They were both across the street at the Happy Jack Saloon, which is across the street from the Lucky Spoon Café.
Statement of Facts
Max alleges that on the date of the shooting of his father, a patron …show more content…
Hall & Upson Co. – Smithwick was told not to work on a platform but was not told that the wall was about to collapse. He worked on platform despite the warning because he believed the risk of falling was the only danger. The court held that the failure to heed a warning is not contributory negligence if the injury was the result of a different source of risk caused by the defendant, and the injured party was unaware of that risk.”
“Solomon v. Shuell – Plain clothes police officers were arresting robbery suspects. The decedent thought the suspects were being attacked and was shot by one of the officers when he came out of his house with a gun. The court held that under the rescue doctrine, contributory negligence is not present if the rescuer had a reasonable belief that the victim was in actual danger.” (http://www.lawnix.com/cases/contributory-negligence.html).
Conclusion
Max Jones, and his father, Louis Jones, were not patrons of the Lucky Spoon Café at the time of the shooting. They were patrons of the Happy Jack Saloon across the street. The Lucky Spoon Café is not negligent in this