Why choose us?

We understand the dilemma that you are currently in of whether or not to place your trust on us. Allow us to show you how we can offer you the best and cheap essay writing service and essay review service.


Senario 1

Mario took his laptop to Oakhurst Electronics for repairs. Oakhurst repaired the laptop at a cost of $200
and told Mario that his computer was ready for pick up. Before Mario came to pick up the computer,
Oakhurst was burglarized and Mario�s computer was stolen. Oakhurst used an alarm system that was
working properly and all of the doors and windows were properly secured. Mario sued Oakhurst for the
cost of the laptop. Oakhurst denied liability and counterclaimed for the $200 in repairs. What are the
arguments for each party? Decide which party should win and provide support for your answers with the

applicable law and/or text material.

Scenario 3

Gordon rented an apartment in a relatively safe neighborhood in Savannah. The door to Gordon�s
apartment had two locks, and one of the locks was a deadbolt designed to prevent burglaries. When
Gordon left for work, he engaged both locks; however, when he returned that evening, Gordon
discovered that someone had broken into the apartment by forcibly breaking the locks. Gordon incurred a
loss of almost $5,000 from property taken by the burglar. Gordon contacted the manager of the
apartments who had the locks repaired. The repairs were not entirely successful, because on some
occasions the locks did not operate properly. The faulty repair allowed the door to be easily opened
whenever someone pushed against the door. Gordon complained about the locks on numerous
occasions, but the manager did not take any action. A month after the repair, a burglar again broke into
Gordon�s apartment, stealing the brand new items he had replaced from the previous burglary. This
time, there was no breaking of the locks. The evidence was that the locks were not working properly at
the time of the burglary. Gordon sued the owner for the losses from the two burglaries. What are the

WK4A1 2

arguments for each party? Decide which party should win and provide support for your answer with the

applicable law and/or text material.

Below is feedback by professor from previous assignments, please apply.

Would like to have seen a stronger use of case law, examples, and statutory authority woven into the

written paper.

Please make sure to include robust analysis with specific legal examples and legal authority.
Would like to see a stronger use of content related professional vocabular

WK4A1 3

Scenario 1

Mario would argue that Oakhurst Electronics violated the duty of care as specified in the
bailment contract. As such, Mario could claim that, as the custodian, Oakhurst Electronics had
the duty of reasonable care, meaning that the repairer was supposed to keep his laptop safe and
return it once the repair was facilitated. This duty was defined in Coggs v Bernard. However, the
latter violated this obligation, meaning that the agency was liable to Mario (Newman, 2015).
Oakhurst Electronics, however, would argue that the company took reasonable care by trying to
mitigate the loss of the laptop. He would support this claim by stating that he had a working
alarm system in place and that he had duly secured doors and windows. Nonetheless, the court
would probably rule for Mario (Newman, 2015). The institution would argue that, while there
was sufficient security system, it did not operate that particular day. Thus, Oakhurst Electronics
was grossly negligent.

Scenario 3

This scenario concerns the tenancy agreement contract. Based on the facts of the case,
Gordon would argue that manager neglected his duty to ensure the safety of the apartment by not
confirming the quality of the repairs. Similarly, the tenant might claim that the manager failed to
respond to his repair notice appropriately (Collins, 2014). Thus, the incidence of negligence was
the proximate cause of the robberies. In the light of this, Gordon would purport that the manager
was liable for the damages. The manager, on his part, would claim that Gordon, as a tenant, also
had the duty to mitigate the losses by keeping his valuable items safely. Nonetheless, based on
the law of tenancy, it is perceptible that Gordon’s argument holds material (Collins, 2014). The

WK4A1 4

landlord or his/her representative must ensure the security of the apartment in the first place
before expecting the tenant to safeguard his or her items.

WK4A1 5


Collins, H. (2014). Life Time Contracts: Social Long-term Contracts in Labour, Tenancy and
Consumer Credit Law. European Review of Contract Law, 10(3), 466-472.
Newman, C. M. (2015). Bailment and the Property/Contract Interface. George Mason Legal
Studies Research Paper No. LS, 15-12.

All Rights Reserved, scholarpapers.com
Disclaimer: You will use the product (paper) for legal purposes only and you are not authorized to plagiarize. In addition, neither our website nor any of its affiliates and/or partners shall be liable for any unethical, inappropriate, illegal, or otherwise wrongful use of the Products and/or other written material received from the Website. This includes plagiarism, lawsuits, poor grading, expulsion, academic probation, loss of scholarships / awards / grants/ prizes / titles / positions, failure, suspension, or any other disciplinary or legal actions. Purchasers of Products from the Website are solely responsible for any and all disciplinary actions arising from the improper, unethical, and/or illegal use of such Products.