Reference no: EM133287870

Question 1. In Costa v. Red Sox, Jane Costa was severely injured when she was hit by a foul ball while attending a Red Sox baseball game. Because of her location behind the dugout and because of the speed at which the ball was traveling, she had only 1.07 seconds to react. She was in critical condition, endured reconstructive surgery to install eight plates in her face, and suffered over $486,000 in lost wages and medical bills. She sued the Red Sox, Fenway Park, and Major League Baseball, claiming they were negligent in failing to warn her of the dangers that foul balls present to fans in attendance. In deciding against her and in favor of the defendants, the court held that defendants had no obligation to warn attendees of such danger since the dangers of foul balls should be obvious to anyone in attendance. Thus, which element of Negligence did the court say was missing from plaintiff Costa's case?

Question 2. Destiny decides to take her dog to the dog park. After parking her car, and while still a few hundred feet from the gated dog park section of the park, she goes ahead and lets her dog off its leash early, thinking he is a good dog and won't run off from her. Well, he proceeds to run off from her and to chase Marvin, who has always been afraid of dogs. The dog then jumps on Marvin, knocks him down, and bites him on the arm. Marvin dies of a heart attack two weeks later. Then, his relatives sue Destiny for Negligence for causing the wrongful death of Marvin. This is a two-part essay.

(a) Please explain why Destiny should NOT be held liable for Negligence. Phrase your answer in terms of the elements necessary for a successful claim for Negligence.

(b) Please explain why Destiny SHOULD be held liable for Negligence. Phrase your answer in terms of the elements necessary for a successful claim of Negligence.