Answer:
The assumption of risk theory in Florida is limited to two types of cases
(a) The complainant has decided not to sue the corporation for any losses or compensations.
(b) The damage is continuous through involvement in contact casual.
As none of the complaint prevails in the case ( As per specified facts), it is upon jury to analyses the risk in proportional fault policy that consents for a jury to regulate the plaintiff’s own proportion of fault in the accident giving rise to his grievances, and deduct the complainant's compensation by that quantity. Gator World is liable for compensations as it should have had appropriate security preparation in place to prevent the consumers from a sudden occurrence ( given the nature of animal, such occurrences could have occurred anytime), when he /she has his /her back to the animal, and is not in situation to realize and save himself / herself from a sudden attack. The proportional fault theory will also take into explanation the degree of negligence assumed by the complainant, while deciding on compensation.
Gator World has two defenses.
(a) The contract between client and firm involves a no-sue clause.
(b) The customer, self-proclaimed as adrenaline junkie performed in risky way by receiving too close to the animal, and dishonored the code of behavior /guidelines providing to him by the corporation.
