Case Include Severe Permanent Mock Trial Case And

Mock Trial

Case: Johnson vs. Coldrock Tire and Rubber Company

This is a civil case because it involves an individual suing an organization or a business. A civil case can be instituted by a private individual, a business entity, or a government can sue an organization or an individual. The case also qualifies for consideration as civil because all involved did not break particular laws or commit criminal activity. Lastly, this is an equitable claim civil case because the plaintiff presents various claims against the defendant.

The client in this scenario is John “Johnny” Johnson, a mechanic working at Infiniti of Parkland. He is currently represented by a law firm of Dewey, Cheatem & Howe, LLP. Based on this type of civil law case, the client or plaintiff can also be referred to as the claimant because he institutes a claim against the defendant. This client is chosen based on the facts arising from the case scenario; for example, the defendant’s decision to ineffectively label the tire potentially caused the explosion. Also, the plaintiff’s employer assumed that because it was a commonality to install smaller tires on larger rims of the Infiniti G35. This was a cause of neglect by the defendant and Johnson’s employer, who argued against the user directions indicated on the tire.

Johnson is suing Coldrock Tire and Rubber Company, the designer of the wheel in question. However, the plaintiff will sue the company through its chief executive, Roger “Cole” Coldrock. The defendant is represented by the Wall Street firm of Ben, Jarvis, Green & Ellis, LLP. The legal proceeding is founded on the point that the defendant failed to label the tire explicitly. Also, the plaintiff claims that the label was not sufficiently conspicuous or effectively depicted, resulting in the risks and danger witnessed in the scenario.

To establish and substantiate a prima facie civil case ground, the plaintiff, Johnson, will be required to provide adequate submissions substantiating how the defendant indicated negligence that caused harm before requesting the court to offer relief. The set of actions that warrant the grounds for this case include severe permanent injuries caused by the tire’s explosion. The plaintiff sustained injuries; he lost three fingers on his right hand and a permanent vision loss in his right eye. Therefore, the elements to help argue the negligence cause of action, the plaintiff will have to prove or defend breach, harm, duty, and causation. The set of facts presented in the case indicates that Infiniti of Parkland’s manager failed in his duty, Coldrock Tire and Rubber Company breached the user-wellness expectation, the plaintiff suffered harm, and Coldrock Tire and Rubber Company’s product caused harm.