Frank is a professional roofer. On Tuesday, he started work on Alice's house. His first task was to move the new shingles up to the roof - which was three stories high. Frank set up his longest ladder, and attached the shingle-elevator to transport the heavy shingles. Unfortunately, he set up the ladder on soft ground, and with the third load of shingles, the whole assembly tipped over. The load of shingles landed on a piece of wood resting on Alice's deck furniture. This caused the piece of wood to catapult into the neighbor's yard, where it knocked over a lit charcoal grill, and causing significant damage to the neighbor's deck.

The neighbor has sued Frank for negligence. Frank comes to you and asks you to evaluate his situation. He says, "I'll pay for Alice's furniture I damaged, but what about the neighbor's deck?"

1. List the elements that must be proven for tort liability.
2. For each element, identify facts that must be considered to evaluate the neighbor's claim.
3. If you conclude Frank is liable, summarize why each element is satisfied. If you conclude he is not liable, indicate which elements are missing and why.

I need help to analyze this based on questions for class discussion.