DISCUSS EACH QUESTION BASED ON THE ISSUE OF LAW PRESENTED. IF THERE IS A SPECIFIC THEORY OR ARGUMENT YOU ARE USING THEN QUALIFY YOUR ANSWER BY SPECIFICS AND/OR THE LAW OR RULE/CASE LAW ETC...THAT YOU ARE CITING. YOUR CONCLUSION IS AN IMPORTANT PART OF YOUR ANSWER...DISCUSS YOUR REASONING.

8. Morris rented an apartment in a relatively safe neighborhood of a major city. The door to Morris' apartment had two locks, and one of these was of the deadbolt variety designed to prevent burglaries. Morris left for work and engaged both locks. When Morris returned from work, Morris found that a burglar had broken into the apartment by forcibly breaking the locks. Morris sustained a substantial loss of money and property from this burglary. Morris notified the building superintendent and the owner who had the locks repaired. The attempted repairs were not entirely successful inasmuch as the locks did not properly lock on some occasions. This enabled the door to be readily opened whenever anyone pushed against the door. Morris complained frequently about the condition of the locks, but the owner would take no further action regarding them. Finally, a burglar again broke into Morris' apartment stealing substantial sums. This time, there was no breaking of the locks. The evidence was that the locks were not working properly at the time of the break in. Morris sued the owner for the losses from the two burglaries.

DECIDE the outcome...DISCUSS your reasoning and the legal issues

DISCUSS EACH QUESTION BASED ON THE ISSUE OF LAW PRESENTED. IF THERE IS A SPECIFIC THEORY OR ARGUMENT YOU ARE USING THEN QUALIFY YOUR ANSWER BY SPECIFICS AND/OR THE LAW OR RULE/CASE LAW ETC...THAT YOU ARE CITING. YOUR CONCLUSION IS AN IMPORTANT PART OF YOUR ANSWER...DISCUSS YOUR REASONING.

9. Roberts leased a duplex from Hughes. Later, without Hughes' knowledge, Roberts sublet half of the duplex to Carrera. Carrera did not take proper care of the premises and her part of the duplex was substantially damaged as a result of her negligent use and abuse. Upon discovering the situation, Hughes notified Roberts that he was holding him responsible for any and all damages to Carrera's portion of the duplex, and that Roberts was to bear the costs of returning the premises to the original state of repair. Roberts replied that he had sublet to Carrera in good faith, had had no dealings with Carrera after the sublet agreement, had no knowledge of negligence, and could not be held liable for damages caused by another.

DISCUSS, Can Roberts be held liable? WHY/WHY NOT ...

DISCUSS What are the legal issues?