Question

House was riding his bike on a city street. While he was riding, he frequently looked back to verify that the books that he had fastened to the rear part of his bike werestill attached. On one occasion while he was looking behind his back, he failed to notice a car that was entering an intersection just as he was crossing it. The car hit her, causing her to sustain numerous injuries. Three eye witnesses stated that the driver of the car had filled to stop at the stop sign before entering the intersection. House sued the driver of the car for negligence. What defenses might the defendant driver raise in this law suit? Discuss fully.

Answer 1

Answer:

The major premise is lack of House to pay attention towards the road ahead of him and the rule of contributory negligence. By using this jurisdiction, the plaintiff's damages will be reduced.

Explanation:

• The defendant driver, while he may ultimately be liable if all of the witnesses say he ran the stop sign, will raise the comparative fault of House for failing to keep a proper lookout and failing to take evasive action to avoid a collision.
• The defenses are the same as they would be if the collision was with another car instead of a bicycle.
• House had an ordinary duty to pay attention to the road ahead of him and keep himself and others safe.
• By watching his books and not the traffic, he breached that duty.
• I'm not saying that defense will be successful, but that's what would be alleged by the car's driver as a defense.
• In most states, the damages to the plaintiff will be reduced by the percentage of his/her comparative fault (also known in some jurisdictions as contributory negligence).
• In some states, if the plaintiff's comparative fault is shown to be over 50%, there will be no recovery at all.