Question

Lana hires Mike, an architect, to design a warehouse. Lana is dissatisfied with the look of the new building and sues Mike, alleging negligence.
Mike can successfully defend against the suit by providing that:

a. he is not familiar with every principle of art.
b. his design is as attractive as an ordinary person’s.
c. Lana could not have designed a more attractive building.
d. Lana was not injured in any way.

Answer 1

Answer: The answer is Lana was not injured in any way.

Explanation:Lana doesn't like the way the building looks but she has no damage to herself or the building. She doesn't like how the work is done but that doesn't mean that the architect had negligence.

I hope I have helped you.

Answer 2

Answer:

d. Lana was not injured in any way.

Explanation:

In this example, Lana wants to sue Mike for negligence. However, the reason that she has to complain is the fact that she does not like the design of the house Mike came up with. This is not equivalent to negligence. Negligence refers to a failure to exercise appropriate care. This is usually invoked when a person suffers harm because of someone else's carelessness. However, in this case, Lana was not injured in any way.