On the morning of October 2, 1989, a fire started by an arsonist broke out in the Red Inn in Provincetown, Massachusetts. The inn had smoke detectors, sprinklers, and an alarm system, all of which alerted the guests, but there were no emerÂgency lights or clear exits. Attempting to escape, Deborah Addis and James Reed, guests at the inn, found the first-floor doors and windows locked. Ultimately, they forced open a secÂond-floor window and jumped out. To recover for their injuries, they filed a suit in a Massachusetts state court against Tamerlane Corp., which operated the inn under a lease, and others (including Duane Steele, who worked for the owner of the inn). Under what tort theory discussed in this chapter might Addis and Reed recover damages from Tamerlane and the others? What must they prove to recover damages under this theory? Discuss fully. Solution From Tamerlane Corp perspective its an \"Unintentional Tort\" since its an unintentional accident that led to injury, property damage or financial loss. In the event of an unintentional tort, the person who caused the accident did so inadvertently and typically because he or she was not being careful. The person who caused the accident is considered negligent because he or she failed to exercise the same degree of care that a reasonable person would have in the same situation. In this case there were no clear exits or emergency lights which would lead people to safety and hence Tamerlane Corp may have to pay a plaintiff for physical injuries, property damage and/or financial loss.In general, the plaintiff will have to prove that the defendant owed the plaintiff a duty of care, that the defendant did not act as a reasonable person would have, that the defendant\'s actions or inactions caused the injury and/or loss, and that the plaintiff suffered some type of harm or injury as a result of the defendant\'s actions or inactions. .

1. On the morning of October 2, 1989, a fire started by an arsonist broke out in the Red Inn in
Provincetown, Massachusetts. The inn had smoke detectors, sprinklers, and an alarm system, all
of which alerted the guests, but there were no emerÂgency lights or clear exits. Attempting to
escape, Deborah Addis and James Reed, guests at the inn, found the first-floor doors and
windows locked. Ultimately, they forced open a secÂond-floor window and jumped out. To
recover for their injuries, they filed a suit in a Massachusetts state court against Tamerlane Corp.,
which operated the inn under a lease, and others (including Duane Steele, who worked for the
owner of the inn). Under what tort theory discussed in this chapter might Addis and Reed
recover damages from Tamerlane and the others? What must they prove to recover damages
under this theory? Discuss fully.
Solution
From Tamerlane Corp perspective its an "Unintentional Tort" since its an unintentional
accident that led to injury, property damage or financial loss. In the event of an unintentional
tort, the person who caused the accident did so inadvertently and typically because he or she was
not being careful. The person who caused the accident is considered negligent because he or she
failed to exercise the same degree of care that a reasonable person would have in the same
situation.
In this case there were no clear exits or emergency lights which would lead people to safety and
hence Tamerlane Corp may have to pay a plaintiff for physical injuries, property damage and/or
financial loss.In general, the plaintiff will have to prove that the defendant owed the plaintiff a
duty of care, that the defendant did not act as a reasonable person would have, that the
defendant's actions or inactions caused the injury and/or loss, and that the plaintiff suffered
some type of harm or injury as a result of the defendant's actions or inactions.