Please answer the following questions:

Negligence: The basics: Duty, Breach, Proximate Cause, Damages Read the following hypothetical situation and discuss whether any of the three plaintiffs in the case have a reasonable chance of recovery against the defendant in a tort claim. Evaluate each of the usually required parts of a tort suit, cited above and determine whether you think the plaintiff can establish each element. Two children, Bob and Ted, each age 10, not related, are playing football in their backyard. One of the boys threw the football over the neighbor's fence where it landed in his (Mr. Smith's) backyard. The fence is six feet high, made of wood, and has a gate leading to the front of the property, which is usually locked and was so at the time the boys were playing their game. Mr. Smith has posted a sign on his fence, saying "Do not enter, Property protected by Honeywell Security." There is no evidence that such a security system was employed by Mr. Smith, making the sign an elaborate ruse. The boys had been warned repeatedly not to enter the yard without permission, which they had done on at least three separate occasions to play in Mr. Smith's above ground pool, which is unguarded and situated in the backyard of the property. The pool has a depth ranging from 4 feet at the shallow end to 12 feet at the deeper end. The two boys scale the fence using a ladder from Bob's parents' garage and they boost themselves up and over the fence into Mr. Smith's backyard. Upon retrieving the football, the boys saw that the pool remained full of water and there was no barrier to entrance. Putting aside any concerns about the neighbor's desire to keep them out of the property and specifically the pool, the two boys jump in and begin to splash around and swim. After a short period, Bob decides to show off his diving skills to his friend, Ted. Bob dives into the middle area of the pool thinking its depth is the uniform 12 feet that it is at the deep end, and miscalculates, hitting his head on the concrete floor of the pool and knocking himself unconscious. Seeing this, Ted rushes over to try and help his friend, and starts making loud noises, screaming for help as he struggles to bring Bob up fromthe bottom of the pool, lacking the physical strength to complete the task as the two boys continue to bob up and down in the water. Hearing the screams for help, a bystander, Mr. Jones, comes running to the scene from across the street. Seeing the two boys struggling in the pool, he takes an axe that he was using to prune trees across the street on his property, and smashes through the fence to gain entrance to the backyard. Mr. Jones then runs toward the pool, slips on the edge of it and tumbles into the water, smacking his arm against the side of the pool, breaking it in three places as well as dislocating his hip. All three individuals are struggling in the water when the homeowner, Mr. Smith, arrives on the scene. After observing this spectacle, Mr. Smith, calls 911 emergency for assistance, then proceeds to the pool and aids the two boys first in getting them out of the pool, then returns for Mr. Jones holding his head above water until paramedics arrive on the scene. As a result of this incident, Bob suffers a severe concussion and is evaluated with significant brain injury from the collision. Ted is physically unhurt but traumatized by the experience, causing him to have what will become a lifelong terror of water, refusing to go near lakes, streams, oceans, or pools where he develops panic attacks upon the mere sight of large bodies of water. Mr. Jones suffers a broken arm and hip, both of which require significant surgeries and is diagnosed with permanent injury to the hip that will likely require subsequent surgeries to allow him to function in the next several years. Evaluate the claim potential for Bob, Ted, and Mr. Jones. Specifically, examine: 1. Did Mr. Smith owe a duty of care to any or all the three plaintiffs in the case? 2. Did Mr. Smith breach that duty of care in his behavior or lack of caution in this scenario? 3. Is Mr. Smith's alleged negligence the proximate or legal cause of the injuries to any of the plaintiffs, and if so, 4. What damages will each plaintiff seek and what is the likelihood of recovery for any of them?