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
51. Should the court grant the motion?
A driver, returning home from a long work shift at a factory, fell asleep at the wheel and lost control of his car. As a result, his car collided with a police car driven by an officer who was returning to the station after having responded to an emergency. The officer was injured in the accident and later sued the driver in negligence for her injuries. The driver has moved for summary judgment, arguing that the common law firefighters' rule bars the suit.
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. This answer correctly states that the driver's motion should be denied, but it misstates the legal basis for this conclusion. The firefighters' rule, although named with reference to firefighters, also covers police officers. They, too, are public servants at risk of injury by the perils that they have been employed to confront. Instead, the motion should be denied because being struck by a car in normal traffic is not one of the special risks inherent to dangerous police work. The firefighters' rule bars only claims for injuries that result from risks that are unique or special to the plaintiff's inherently dangerous work.
C is incorrect. But-for causation is not sufficient to support the firefighters' rule defense when the risk that materialized was not one of the unique risks inherent to the officer's dangerous work. The firefighters' rule bars only claims for injuries that result from risks that are unique or special to the plaintiff's inherently dangerous work. The fact that the officer was returning from an emergency when she was struck is just a coincidence.
D is incorrect. The firefighters' rule bars only claims for injuries that result from risks that are unique or special to the plaintiff's inherently dangerous work. Workers' compensation, not the common law of torts, is the compensation system for on-the-job injuries. The driver could be held liable for his negligence because being struck by a car in normal traffic is not one of the special risks inherent to dangerous police work.