Welcome to Just Answer (“JA”)! My name is Maverick. Please note that:
(A) The information we provide is general information. No attorney-client relationship or privilege is formed by communicating with me. If you want legal advice, you must consult with a local attorney in person before acting or deciding not to act based on any information given here;
(B) When I feel that I have provided you with a complete answer, I will ask for you to assign a feedback rating so that JA will compensate me for my time. Please wait until then to assign the rating; and
(C) You should not be concerned about any short delays between your questions and my replies. Please know that I answer most questions within the hour if I am signed on. If I am not signed on, then I still make every attempt to respond within 24 hours.
Thank you for taking the time to understand how this site works. By continuing, you confirm that you understand and agree to these terms.
8) They went to trial and the judge gave 30 days for the customer to find case law supporting the argument that it is unreasonable for the customer to be responsible for this kind of incident.
This appears to be a trick question since the law would require the rental company to prove the elements of negligence to prevail on a suit against the customer. In other words the plaintiff has the burden of proof to prove its negligence claim against the defendant. Further, the rental company would most likely need to offer expert witness testimony from a mechanic that inspected the golf cart and show that there was no brake malfunction but that the customer was negligent by not pulling the brake all the way, for example. The customer could offer expert witness testimony to counter this also: say, for example, that the customer hired a mechanic to examine the golf cart after the incident and found that the brake cable was woren and snapped due to no fault of the customer.
"The elements of negligence are: (1) a duty to the plaintiff; (2) the defendant’s breach of that duty; (3) injury to the plaintiff arising from the defendant’s breach; and (4) damage caused by the injury to the plaintiff as a result of the defendant’s breach of duty. Westchester Exxon v. Valdes, 524 So. 2d 452, 454 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988). As the plaintiff, Delgado bears the burden of proof at trial, and for Delgado to prevail, “it must be shown that the owner negligently failed where the law, custom, or innate danger requires diligence.” See Heps v. Burdine’s, Inc., 69 So. 2d 340, 341-42 (Fla. 1954).
Also, the other way to defend this case is that the rental company cannot limit its liability for the implied warranties of merchantability and fitness for particualr purpose unless the contract terms comply with this law. In other words the rental company had a duty to provide you with a cart that did not have a defective brake system and and they could not pawn liability for that defect off on you without the contract complying with the "as is" provisions of this law.
(D) If this answers your question, please go ahead and assign a feedback rating now.
(E) If you are not satisfied with the answer, I would appreciate knowing why so that I can try to clear up any misunderstanding that may have taken place.
(F) You may request me in the future on new and unrelated questions by beginning the question with "THIS IS FOR MAVERICK". Thank you for using Just Answer.
What cases are there that would be a good defense for case law in this particular scenario?