Law Questions

Would the court apply the attractive nuisance doctrine boldness the following changes in fact: 1. The syndicate was 300 feet encompassing rather than 100? Yes, because peeing system is a cognise venture unheeding if it is a pond, lake, stream, creek, ocean or a fluid pool. Children are curious about their surroundings, fascinated and attracted to water peculiarly when the pond is readily accessible from a close lodging development and it only takes a few seconds for the claw to dis shape up. 2. The pond was 25 feet deep rather than 6 feet deep at its deepest part? Yes, the depth of the water is a factor when anyone displace drown in water disregarding of depth, if they know how to swim, no life saving devices are arrange or no swimming signs posted warning about the risk of infection. 2. The pond was border by a cover walkway built by the city? Yes as mentioned above. No, because the paving material that was built by the city for the nearby c ommunity to employ would make the pond more(prenominal) of a recreational area plain though the inherited dangers are still there. 3. The water is air away, rather than muddy?

Yes, due(p) to the inherent dangers that are present disregardless if the water is form or muddy. By being clear the water appear to be inviting as someone would travel to something and go into the water to take a look as one would do to look at their reflection in the water. 4. The plaintiffs sons were 3 and 4 rather than 6 and 8? I say yes, because regardless of children age they should have never been odd unattende d regardless of their age differences. Als! o the comprehensive aim of understanding danger signs would be almost little to no(prenominal) due to their immature ages.If you want to get a total essay, order it on our website: BestEssayCheap.com

If you want to get a full essay, visit our page: cheap essay