2.5 pts Adeline is a 20-year-old working for Ears-R-Us, Inc. As part of her job, Adeline is required to give free ear piercings. During Adeline's work shift on a Tuesday at approximately 4:00pm, a 12-year-old girl named Chloe walks into Ears-R-Us with her mom and requests to have her ears pierced. As Chloe is sitting down to have her ears pierced, Adeline mistakenly pierces Chloe's head and causes severe damage. Adeline was not functioning properly at work that day due to heavy alcohol consumption. Chloe's parents sue Ears-R-Us. Is Ears-R-Us liable as a result of Adeline's actions? O No, Ears-R-Us is not responsible for Adeline's own negligence. No, Ears-R-Us is not responsible because a reasonable person would conclude that Adeline breached her duty of care. Yes, Ears-R-Us is responsible according to the concept of res ipsa loquitur. Yes, Ears-R-Us is responsible according to the doctrine of respondeat superior. Both "No, Ears-R-Us is not responsible for Adeline's own negligence" and "No, Ears-R-Us is not responsible because a reasonable person would conclude that Adeline breached her duty of care."