Patty's Negligent Tort Claim Against Cash Mart and Acme Corporation - Essay Sample

Introduction

There are possible tort claims that Patty can make against Cash Mart. The first one is a negligent tort. It refers to a tort that has been committed due to failure to act reasonably towards a person that is owed a duty as required by law in different circumstances (Masaryk University, 2019). The security guard at Cash Mart was supposed to act reasonably by searching Patty after she had denied shoplifting. It is the requirement of the law. Negligent torts are also deliberate and result in injuries (Masaryk University, 2019). The security deliberately apprehended Patty despite her denying the stealing claims. Patty was also hit by a golf ball as she was walking out of the store.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Order now

The second type of tort is false imprisonment. This tort states that one should not be detained without their consent (Masaryk University, 2019). It goes on to further state that detaining should be based on reasonable grounds. Patty was late for work and as such, she did consent to be detained. She was threatened by the security guard to prevent her from leaving the room. The detention was also not based on reasonable grounds. Patty was not searched and was held for a long time.

Claims Against Gerry Golfer

There are elements of a negligent tort that can apply in the claims against Gerry Golfer. The first element is the duty to care (Masaryk University, 2019). Garry owed Patty a legal duty to act with reasonable care in this situation. When Garry was hitting golf balls, he had the legal duty of ensuring that it did not hit or injure anyone. The second element is the breach of legal duty (Masaryk University, 2019). It involves breaching duty by acting or failing to act in a certain way. Garry failed to consider the safety of the people in the parking lot of the mall and as such breached his duty to care.

The third element is causation. It implies that the defendant's actions caused a plaintiff's injuries (Masaryk University, 2019). When Garry hit the golf ball, it hit Patty's head and knocked her unconscious. She had to be taken to the hospital and spent five days to recover from her injuries. The other element is damages. It proves that the plaintiff was injured or harmed as a result of the actions of the defendant (Masaryk University, 2019). Apart from the physical injuries that Patty experienced, she failed to go to work for about five days.

Claims Against Acme Corporation

Patty does not have a right to privacy when using Acme Corporation's e-mail system. It is considered as trespass to personal property. This law states that using someone's property without their permission is a crime (Masaryk University, 2019). It involves converting someone's property for one's use. An intention to use this property must be proved. Acme's policy prohibited the use of company email for personal communications. Patty intentionally sent an email to her mum about her injuries. However, there is a limited exception when an employer promises to not monitor employee emails.

When Patty was fired from her job for making negative comments about her boss and company, she engaged in defamation. It refers to false statements that harm the reputation of an individual or an organization (Masaryk University, 2019). To sue for this action, Patty has to prove that the statements that she made were indeed true. She also has to prove that there was no publication to a third party and that the company did not suffer damage from these actions.

References

Masaryk University (2019). Law of torts. Retrieved from https://is.muni.cz/do/1496/impact/archiv/ka2/en/55961486/56079180/06_Law_of_Torts-Teachers.pdf