This question should be answered using two IRAC structures. Please include all relevant key words in your answer.
Pluto Corporation is sued in two wrongful death cases. In the first case, Wendy claims that her deceased husband died in a car accident because Pluto did not fix a dangerous flaw in its seatbelt design. Pluto argues that there is no proof that Wendy’s husband was wearing a seatbelt at the time of the accident. Wendy calls her husband’s coworker to testify that in several decades of riding to work together, her husband always wore his seatbelt. In the second case, Harry claims that his deceased wife died in a car accident because Pluto did not fix a dangerous flaw in its brake design. Pluto argues that it did not know about the flaw and calls an employee to testify that there have been no other accidents resulting from a brake failure in Pluto’s cars.
Should the coworker’s testimony and the employee’s testimony be excluded?
NotepadClick anywhere in notepad to add a note
Topic Label Each Sentence
To provide the most accurate and beneficial review, critique, and feedback to your writing, please topic label each sentence of your answer, as seen below, prior to submitting.
Hint
To answer this question, you should think about and discuss first what type of habit evidence is admissible, and second, whether absence of similar accidents may occasionally be admissible.
drag_indicator
drag_indicator
+
Select Issue/Subject to discuss
Coworker's Testimony
Employee's Testimony
Topics
Grammar
Readability
Tone
Grade
Critique and FeedbackHang tight! Your Reviewer is critiquing and scoring your submission which could take 30-90 seconds.
Saving Progress ...
All work will be saved, however the time spent will start from zero when you continue.