Rusholme v. Saunders and Watts, Essay Example

The main concern of this case is to determine liability for the damages.  The first question concerns whether or not the Rusholmes had turned off the pilot light to the gas stove.  This small flame could have caused the explosion and must have been manually turned off when working with flammable substances.  The second question is if the Rusholmes had not turned off the pilot light, it is necessary to determine if Saunders and Watts had notified the Rusholmes of all substances that would be utilized during the refinishing process.  This may be a liability issue whereby Saunders and Watts must have informed the Rusholmes of the flammable chemicals to ensure that the pilot light and all other electrical or sparking elements were turned off.  Finally, the last legal question must determine whether the company was obligated to follow the customers’ requests to leave the house ventilated and provide the key to the neighbor.  However, the precedence of the court case that Saunders had recalled regarding the thievery may have led to the more legally-intelligent action.  All of these questions must be determined to effectively produce a fair verdict on this case.

Given the facts of the case, it would appear that the Rusholme family is liable for the damages caused by the explosion.  Although the answers to the other questions are unclear, it is the responsibility of the homeowner or resident to turn off all electric or gas elements that could cause any unforeseen accident.  The mere presence of the finishing chemicals does not create opposition to the Rusholmes needing to turn off the pilot light.  Saunders had performed an intelligent action by covering the potential theft liability.  If thieves had taken anything while the house was ventilating, the neighbor who was supposed to have the key would not be held liable.  Instead, the flooring company would be responsible and liable for all missing items; therefore, locking the home was very smart.  By locking the home, the chemicals did not have the proper ventilation and caused the pilot light to ignite the chemicals.  Again, if the pilot light and all other elements that may cause a spark were turned off, the explosion would have never occurred.  The family is liable for all damages and the case would likely be dismissed.