SURNAME 1

Name:

Course:

Instructor:

Date

Case: Johnson Vs. Cold rock Tire and Rubber Company

Your honor, members of the jury I am Roger Cole I stand in this court room to represent

Mr. Johnson together with my colleagues’ senior counsel Mr. James, Mr. Smith and a

well experienced lawyer Mr. Jack. The day of the explosion was on the month of March

the year 2012.We will present evidence to you that Mr. Johnson did not commit any

crime of this nature on this date. Johnson is a mechanic and an employee of Parkland

who made an attempt to mount a tire that had a diameter of sixteen inches on a rim that

was 17inches on an Infiniti G35 wheel. During the activity of fixing the tire on the wheel,

the mechanic leaned towards the assembly, but unfortunately, the tire exploded leading to

severe body injuries to the worker. During the explosion, Mr.Johnsons right-hand figures

were completely damaged as well as the vision of one of his eyes. On the other hand,

apart from the mechanic job, the plaintiff was also involved in the reggae music. Ideally,

on the day of the accident Mr.Jonhson had received a contract with one of the recording

companies that had promised to pay him a lump sum of dollars. Mr. Johnson had

recorded his reggae albums in a company known as Tinsel town Records. Mr. Johnson

has filed the case against three main parties. These parties include the company that had

employed him that is the American hawk company. Others who are involved in the case
 SURNAME 2

is the Nissan motor company that was the manufacturer of the wheel as well as the cold

rock tire and rubber company that had manufactured the tire.

Regarding his experience in the workplace, Mr. Johnson had experience in mechanic

work of about ten years. Consequently, the plaintiff had also been trained for three

consecutive days at the site by the men who were the representatives of the cold rock

company. The biggest issue that is the bone of contention is the labeling that was done on

the tire. It is evident from the label that one was not supposed to be reckless or ignorant

when fixing the tire because this could result in serious injuries to the person who is

trying to fix the tire. Therefore our team of experts will show that Mr. Johnson is not

guilty of the alleged criminal activity that is tabled before you your honor.

From the label, it was evident that one should not fix a Sixteen-inch tire on a seventeen-

inch rim. The warnings of speculated injuries to anyone who could try to repair the tire

were well illustrated on the tire by a drawing of a mechanic who was trying to fix the tire

but had a red line that had crossed through the drawing. This was a clear warning from

the manufacturing company that one need to be cautious when fixing the tire by not

ignoring the manufacturer's advice. On the other hand, it did not matter whether the label

could be identified by the mechanic or not as long as the manufacturing company had put

the label on the tire. Therefore the issue of the tire exploding is open to Mr. Johnson and

his employer because the label was not clear.

 SURNAME 3

Johnson had ignored the warnings on the tire because most of the time his employer did

not bother much on the proper procedures to follow during the installation of the wheel.

Johnson disclosed that it was a common practice at his place of work to fix small tire on

large rims. Additionally, cold rock did not have a clear design that could be seen at a

glance by the users of the tire. According to Mr. Johnson, other manufacturers of the tires

usually have clear labels that have very different designs. Although coldcock company

argues that the design that they had put on the tire was the best in the market it is clear

from Mr. Johnson that the label is not clear on the tire as shown by the photo I took on

one of the tires in the market that was sold by cold rock company. Additionally from the

witnesses in this case Mr. Johnson is still confirmed not guilty of any wrong doing.

Therefore according to our presentation on this case against Mr. Johnson it is clear that he

has no case to answer and he pledges not guilty of any offence. Your Honor, Ladies and

gentlemen of the jury I thank you for your hearing of the case against Mr. Johnson who

still I insist he is innocent of any wrong doing to his employer and any other unethical

practice he could have been presumed to have committed. I also thank you for your

attention during the hearing of this case.

 SURNAME 4

Conclusion

On the side of the plaintiff, it is evident that the dealer was not keen on his job because he

had a guide to the mechanics that he had employed but he did not share it with all his

workers. There are also instances of the ignorance on the side of the dealer because he

did not pay keen attention to the deal on the label. On the other hand, the cold rock

company is not justified because it did not abide to the business laws and ethics that

requires the manufacturers of the tire to have clear labels on the tires that they produce.