Question

A developer constructed several small stores in a commercial district. She received a bid from a contractor to install awnings on the front windows of the stores. The developer had heard that the contractor did shoddy work, but the price was right and the contractor expressly assumed all of the risk of any liability. The developer subsequently sold one of the stores to a barber. A few months later, an awning collapsed without warning, injuring a customer who was about to enter the barbershop.
An investigation by the building inspector revealed that the awning collapsed because the brackets used by the contractor were cheaper and weaker than the required brackets, although they looked the same. The developer and the contractor are now both bankrupt.
If the customer sues the barber for his injuries, is the customer likely to prevail?

A. Yes, because the barber had a nondelegable duty to keep the premises safe for customers and those passing by.
B. Yes, because the developer did not exercise reasonable care in hiring the contractor to install the awnings.
C. No, because the contractor assumed all of the risks from his work.
D. No, because the barber had no opportunity to oversee the contractor's actions.

Answer 1

Answer:

D. No, because the barber had no opportunity to oversee the contractor's actions.

Explanation:

If the customer sues the barber for his injuries, he is not likely to prevail because the barber was not the one that hired the contractor that installed the awning that collapsed and there is not prove that the barber didn't take the necessary precautions to protect his customers from dangerous conditions as the case states that the awning collapsed without warning so negligence can't be argued. According to this, the answer is no, because the barber had no opportunity to oversee the contractor's actions.