Full access allows:
- Solve all tests online without limits;
- Remove all advertisements on website;
- Adding questions to favorite list;
- Save learning progress;
- Save results of practice exams;
- Watching all wrong answered questions.
- Homepage »
- Torts »
- Negligence
29. The driver's motion should be
The pedestrian sued the driver for damages, and the driver moved for summary judgment. The foregoing facts are undisputed.
While a driver was taking a leisurely spring drive, he momentarily took his eyes off the road to look at some colorful trees in bloom. As a result, his car swerved a few feet off the roadway, directly toward a pedestrian, who was standing on the shoulder of the road waiting for a chance to cross. When the pedestrian saw the car bearing down on him, he jumped backwards, fell, and injured his knee.
Comments (0)
There are no comments at the moment. If you found an error or think question is incorrect, tell everyone about it
Only signed in users can write comments
Signin
A is incorrect. The driver did not act with the purpose of causing the pedestrian to apprehend an imminent harmful or offensive touching. The driver was merely inattentive, which is negligent rather than intentional.
C is incorrect. The pedestrian's action was a cause in fact of his injury, but not necessarily the proximate cause. A summary judgment can only be granted if, as a matter of law, the driver is entitled to judgment and no material fact is in dispute. Clearly, the driver and the pedestrian are disputing which of them is responsible for the pedestrian's taking the jump backwards.
D is incorrect. While momentary distraction may not be unreasonable, the driver had a duty to drive safely, which was breached.