Titanic Case Analysis free essay sample

Titanic Case Analysis Estate of Hans Jensen vs. The White Star Line Facts: The White Star Line was owner of the Titanic, which was the largest and most luxurious ship in the world at the time. On April 10th, 1912, the Titanic left from Southampton, England with 2,227 passengers aboard bound for New York City. On April 14th, the ship struck an iceberg off the coast of Newfoundland and sank about 2 ? hours later. Passengers, mostly women and children, were loaded into lifeboats, however only 705 passengers survived as many lifeboats left partially full. Hans Peder Jensen and his fiance Carla Christine Jensen were passengers from Denmark on the Titanic. Hans Jensen was a carpenter and they had planned to settle in Portland, Oregon after arriving in the US. Hans Jensen did not survive and his body was never recovered. Carla Jensen was on lifeboat 16 and was rescued by Carpathia few hours after Titanic sank. We will write a custom essay sample on Titanic Case Analysis or any similar topic specifically for you Do Not WasteYour Time HIRE WRITER Only 13.90 / page Before Hans and Carla left, they have signed a will, which designated Carla as Hans’s sole heir and executor of his estate. Carla Jensen filed a lawsuit on behalf of Hans Jensen Estate against White Star Lines for the death of his fiance. Carla sued White Star Lines because the ship had struck the iceberg even though other ships had sent ice warning messages, which in turn caused death of her fiance. Carla’s dream of settling in the US and start a new life with Hans was shattered. The story of what actually happened to Hans Jensen the night that Titanic sank was mostly true, even though there are some conflicting accounts by the witnesses. According to Carla Jensen’s information provided to her attorney, Hans Jensen was helping loading passengers into lifeboats when she last saw him. Second Office Lightoller, who was in charge of evacuating the passengers, provided his recollection of what happened that night. Lightoller had talked to Hans while he was helping loading the passengers and saw him getting into the collapsible Lifeboat D. However, when more women and children came, Lightoller asked others to make room and Jensen jumped out of the lifeboat. While the lifeboat was lowered into the water, two men jumped into the boat from another deck, but then he did not see Jensen again. Lieutenant Mauritz Bjornstrom Steffansson, another witness and one of the two men that jumped into Lifeboat D, however had a slightly different version of the story. He claimed that Jensen was actually drunk and was interfering with officers performing their duties, but he did keep the crowd away. Steffansson also said that he last saw Jensen when he got out of the lifeboat. Therefore, both witnesses stated that Hans Jensen voluntarily gave up his seat on the lifeboat and that was the last time anyone has seen him. Negligence: Hans Jensen Estate sued White Star Line claiming White Star was grossly negligent in its operation of the Titanic, resulting in death of over 1,500 passengers, including Hans Jensen. Compensation sought by the plaintiff was for emotional, physical, and financial loss suffered by Hans Jensen and Carla Jensen. The compensation claimed was for: 1) Hans Jensen’s death, 2) the physical injuries and suffering he had to endure as he was frozen to death, 3) the anguish Jensen would have felt knowing that he was going to die, and 4) financial loss of wages he would have earned as a skilled carpenter. In order to claim negligence, the plaintiff must prove that the defendant owed a duty of care to the plaintiff, the defendant had breached the duty, the plaintiff had suffered a legally recognizable injury, and the injury was caused by the defendant’s breach. According to tort law, the duty of care is measured by the reasonable person standard, which is normally defined as what a person with ordinary care would do or not do under similar circumstances. Once defendant is determined to have breached the duty of care, the plaintiff must prove he or she had suffered some kind of loss, harm, wrong, or invasion of protected interest. Another important element is whether there is causation between the breach of duty and the plaintiff’s injury. The first element of negligence is duty of care. According to the plaintiff, White Star Line, which owns and operates Titanic, owes a duty of care to all of the passengers on the ship. All of the passengers relied upon White Star Line to take them to New York safely. Therefore, the crew on Titanic owed duty of care to not only provide food and comfort, but more importantly safety to the passengers. Breach of duty occurs when defendant’s action has created risk of harm to others. In this case, the plaintiff believes that the crew of the Titanic behaved in unreasonable manner in many ways. The actions of the crew members resulted in the Titanic struck a large iceberg and eventually sank causing large casualties, so the duty of care was breached. Whether the breach of duty has caused the plaintiff’s injury is the third element of negligence. Requirements for causation are causation in fact and proximate cause. Causation in fact is determined by the â€Å"but for† test, which means if it was not for the defendant’s breach of duty, harm or injury would not have occurred. Proximate cause is when the connection between the action (breach of duty) and the injury is strong enough to impose liability. Another issue that needs to be considered is foreseeability because the defendant’s action must have created a foreseeable risk of injury. In this case, the crew of Titanic was navigating the ship during the night at high rate of speed in water with iceberg, so the risk of the ship hitting an iceberg and causing casualties can be foreseen. In addition, Plaintiff has to show proof of actual damage caused by the defendant’s actions. The damages claimed in this case by the plaintiff are loss of Hans Jensen’s life, pain and suffering from freezing to death, mental anguish Hans suffered knowing he is going to die, and loss of wages as a carpenter. The plaintiff was seeking compensatory damages as well as punitive damages from the plaintiff for gross negligence in operating the Titanic, causing major loss of life. Defenses to Negligence: The three defenses to negligence are assumption of risk, superseding cause, and contributory negligence. Assumption of risk is when the plaintiff has knowingly and voluntarily enters into a risky situation. If an unforeseeable intervening event occurs that break the causal connection between a wrongful act and the injury, then the superseding cause can be used by the defendant to mitigate the liability for the injury. Finally, contributory negligence can be used as defense if the plaintiff’s own negligence had contributed to the injury. The following are the White Star Line’s defense arguments: First, White Star Line claims that Hans Jensen has voluntarily chosen to step out of Lifeboat D, while everyone that was on the lifeboat survived. Jensen did not have to leave the boat when more women came as there were still empty seats when the boat was lowered. So, the defendant argued Mr. Jensen had â€Å"assumed the risk† when he had knowledge of the risk or danger by not staying in the lifeboat. Jensen should have understood the risk and danger, but he exposed himself to that risk as he had given up the seat he occupied. Both Office Lightoller and Lieutenant Bjornstrom-Steffansson are witnesses who have interacted with Jensen and have seen Jensen getting out of the lifeboat voluntarily. In addition, White Star Lines claimed that the actions of passengers on the Titanic created superseding cause. When passengers became unruly and uncontrollable, Hans Jensen tried to control the passengers even though Office Lightoller informed him it was not necessary, as a result the lifeboat left without Jensen. Therefore, the defendant argued that the actions of passengers had caused Jensen’s death and superseded the alleged negligence on White Star Lines. Contributory negligence due to plaintiff’s own action serves as complete defense to liability for negligence. In this case, White Star Lines claimed that Jensen may have disregarded crew’s direction or was not acting in a reasonable manner at all times due to his drinking, which contributed to his death. Jensen had informed Officer Lightoller that he did have couple drinks for his birthday according to Lightoller’s testimony. Under New York law at the time, any negligence attributable to the plaintiff prevents recovering compensation from the defendant, even though the defendant may have been negligent. Conclusion: Based on the facts of this case, my verdict as a juror is in favor of the plaintiff. White Star Lines’ negligence was the cause for the death of Hans Jensen. The crew of Titanic owed duty of care to its passengers for taking them to New York safely, however that duty of care was breached when the ship had struck an iceberg and sank in the Atlantic Ocean. Titanic had received ice warnings from four other ships, but the warnings were ignored and the ship was traveling at high speed at night when the ice would not be clearly visible from a far distance. The risk of the ship hitting the iceberg could be foreseen. Also, the crew did not properly conduct the evacuation operation as many of the lifeboats left partially full. More passengers could have been saved if the lifeboats were loaded to its full capacity. If it was not for the sinking of the Titanic, Hans Jensen would not have died at such a young age of just 21 years old. The connection between the breach in duty of care and the resulting loss of life is strong enough to warrant liability. The plaintiff did suffer legally recognizable injury, both physically and emotionally, as a victim of this tragedy. Carla Jensen, who is the legal heir to her fiance’s estate, also suffered emotional distress as she has lost the person who was going to support her life financially. All four elements of negligence are present in this case, therefore White Star Lines should be deemed as liable for the death of Hans Jensen. The defendant has raised the issue of assumed risk as defense to this case. It is true that Hans Jensen had voluntarily given up the seat on the lifeboat; however he was not the only one who has gotten out of the lifeboat to make room for the women. In emergency situations, risks are not deemed to be assumed. This situation definitely qualifies as an emergency, so the assumption of risk defense cannot be applied in this case. There were empty seats left on the lifeboat, so Jensen could have jumped back into the boat. But Office Lightoller had lowered the boat before it was full, so Jensen may not have had the time or chance to get back into the lifeboat. If the crew of Titanic had properly handled the evacuation process, then the passengers would not have became uncontrollable and required Jensen’s intervention, therefore this does not qualify as superseding cause that contributed to Jensen’s death. Finally, there is no concrete evidence that Jensen was intoxicated and behaved in unreasonable manner; therefore contributory negligence cannot be applied in this situation. Based on the above analysis, White Star Lines, as owner and operator of Titanic, should compensate the Estate of Hans Jensen for the death and suffering Jensen had endured as result of this tragic incident as well as loss in wages Jensen would have earned as a carpenter in the US.