Members
Login
Sign Up!!!
Categories
Arts
Business
Custom Research
Economics
Film
Foreign
Government and Law
History
Literature
Medical
Miscellaneous
People
Personal Essays
Philosophy
Psychology
Science and Technology

Support
FAQ
Customer Service
Site Search

     Home Customer Service Acceptable Use Policy Site Search

     Enter Search Topic:
 

Already a member? Go here to log in and view the entire paper!

Join Now!
by: Credit Card
Join Now!
by: Online Check
Membership Benefits

Parker v. Tiny Tot Toys

This is an excerpt from the paper...

Plaintiff's minor son, aged five years, suffered injuries on the premises of Defendant toy store on Dec. 23, 2000. On that date, Plaintiff brought her two children to the Defendant's store for Christmas shopping. Defendant's store is organized into departments covering three floors of a building. Each department was staffed with three cashiers. The entrance to the store was also staffed with security guards.

The store featured various displays, including one depicting character Buzz Light Year in a rocket. The display would fly overhead and call out, "To Infinity and Beyond!" every ten seconds. Plaintiff's son (Dustin) asked to see the display, and Plaintiff took her son to the third floor of the store.

Plaintiff instructed Dustin to remain at the Buzz Light Year display while she shopped in a different department on that same floor. She glanced over at him five minutes later and saw him standing where she'd left him, as she'd instructed. Plaintiff then became distracted when her other child suddenly threw a tantrum in another aisle.

Three feet behind the Buzz Light Year display was a lit supply room whose door had been left slightly ajar. The door displayed a "Do Not Enter" sign. During the time that Plaintiff attended to her second child's tantrum, Dustin entered the room to discover that several more Buzz Light Year toys like the display model were suspended from the ceiling of that room. He located a step stool, climb

. . .
efendant obviously knew that children are likely to be present in a toy store. But whether being in a toy store's restricted access areas is tantamount to "trespass" is debatable. ("'[W]hen children of tender years [come] upon the premises by virtue of their unusual attractiveness, the legal effect [is] that of an implied invitation to do so. Such child [is] regarded, not as a trespasser, but as being rightfully on the premises.'" Texas Util., supra at 193, quoting, Banker v. McLaughlin, 146 Tex. 434, 208 S.W.2d 843, 847.) Traditionally, the concept of attractive nuisance, though, has been limited to true trespass situations to property out of doors. See, e.g., Texas Utilities, supra at 192 (minor climbed an outdoor power station tower), Brownfield, supra at 774 (minor playing on railroad trestle), Jannette v. Deprez, 701 S.W.2d 56 (Tex. App. 1985) (minor diving into water filled quarry). Cf. Way v. Boy Scouts of America, 856 S.W.2d 230, 237-238 (Tex. App. 1993)(publication of article magazine geared towards minors about guns and shooting not premises liability and therefore not attractive nuisance.) By contrast, the facts of the instant case involve a licensee situation. A licensee is someone who is "on the premises wit
. . .

Some common words found in the essay are:
Jury Charges, Texas Utilities, Texas Util, Buzz Light, Restatement Torts, Banker McLaughlin, Trespassing Children, Short Answer, Toys Plaintiff's, Tex App, attractive nuisance, step stool, texas utilities, buzz light, tex app, sw 2d, slightly ajar, banker mclaughlin 146, supra 193, mclaughlin 146, 434 208, left slightly ajar, attractive nuisance doctrine, 434 208 sw2d, artificial condition land,
Approximate Word count = 1891
Approximate Pages = 8 (250 words per page)

Membership Benefits
Click here to Join Now!
by: Credit Card
Click here to Join Now!
by: Online Check






to Over 32,000 Professionally Written Papers!!!
 


All papers are for research and reference purposes only!
Copyright © 2009 LotsOfEssays.com
All rights reserved. Webmasters make $$$ NEW