Mechanics National Bank Negligence

Negligence refers to a conduct which falls below the standard established by law for the protection of others (Rest 2d Torts, &282). The law states that everyone is responsible, not only for the result of his/her willful acts, but also for an injury occasioned to another by his/her want of ordinary care or skill in the management of his/her property or person, except so far as the latter has, willfully or by want of ordinary care, brought that injury upon himself/herself (1714, subdivision (a)).

In determining the negligence, we must determine the existence of a duty of care which is the threshold element of a cause of action. It refers to what two or more parties agreed on, failure to which can be termed as negligent act. In this case, Mechanics National Bank owes Ms. Warren a duty to remove the lien it had on the vacant land upon payment in full of the underlying loan. The agreement between Ms. Warren and Mechanics bank was that once Ms. Warren pays the loan in full, the bank is to immediately remove the lien on the land. If this is done, Ms. Warren can use the land as an asset to do whatever she wants, which can include making it as collateral in getting loans from other institutions. If Mechanics bank could have removed

To further prove negligence, there must be a breach of duty of care. In general, a defendant owes the plaintiff a duty to act as would an ordinary person under the same circumstances. In delivering duty, Mechanics bank is expected to honor the agreement by removing the lien on the land once Ms. Warren clears the debt in full. However, this is not the case. Mechanics National Bank failed to remove the lien on time even after Ms. Warren approached several officers in the bank. The failure, as illustrated, was caused by various internal turnovers in the bank which is not even the fault of the plaintiff. It can therefore be concluded that Mechanics National Bank breached its duty of