Question

In Iannelli v. Burger King Corp., Iannelli was assaulted by one or more rowdy teenagers in the defendant's establishment. In determining liability, the court said:
A.Commercial establishments have a duty to protect against hazards such as wet floors but no protection is due regarding fellow customers.
B.Since landlords don't have a duty to protect tenants from criminal attacks, commercial establishments should never be liable based on the same reasoning.
C.Commercial establishments owe a duty as insurers against criminal attacks against their customers at all times and under all circumstances.
D.Commercial establishments owe a duty to protect customers from criminal attacks when there is a foreseeable risk of harm that a criminal act is likely to occur that can be prevented.

Answer

This answer is hidden. It contains 2 characters.