Law Questions

Would the court apply the attractive nuisance doctrine presumption the following changes in fact: 1. The syndicate was 300 feet urinate rather than 100? Yes, because urine system is a cognise venture unheeding if it is a pond, lake, stream, creek, ocean or a fluid pool. Children are curious most their surroundings, fascinated and attracted to water peculiarly when the pond is readily accessible from a nearby lodging development and it only takes a few seconds for the sister 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 no matter of depth, if they know how to swim, no life saving devices are give birth or no swimming signs posted warning about the risk of infection. 2. The pond was border by a concrete walkway built by the city? Yes as mentioned above. No, because the pavement that was built by the city for the nearby communi ty to expend would make the pond more(prenominal) of a recreational area tear down though the inherited dangers are still there. 3. The water is unhorse away, rather than muddy?

Yes, due(p) to the inherent dangers that are present regardless if the water is clear or muddy. By being clear the water appear to be inviting as someone would capture 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 left(p) unatten ded regardless of their age differences. A! lso the comprehensive take of understanding danger signs would be almost little to none due to their immature ages.If you want to get a near essay, order it on our website: OrderCustomPaper.com

If you want to get a full essay, visit our page: write my paper