Tommy was driving home from work and was changing a CD in his CD player. He did not see the traffic light had changed from green to red before he made it into the intersection. As a result, he did not see Susie crossing in the crosswalk and struck her with his car. When Tommy realized what he had done, he stopped the car immediately and got out to help Susie. When he saw that Susie was bleeding profusely, Tommy went back to his car to use his cell phone to call for help.
While Tommy was calling for help, Alexis was driving down the same street. Because Alexis was talking on her cell phone she did not see Susie in the roadway and ran her over, breaking her legs.
A statute in this jurisdiction makes it a misdemeanor to run a red light.
In an action against Tommy and Alexis, what theory or theories, if any, might Susie assert against each defendant? Discuss.
In an action against Tommy and Alexis, what theory or theories, if any, might Susie assert against each defendant? Discuss.© BrainMass Inc. brainmass.com October 10, 2019, 4:03 am ad1c9bdddf
In an action against Tommy, Susie could assert negligence on the part of Tommy in a civil suit, due to the fact that Tommy failed to exercise the pertinent duty of care that is expected of a driver, by taking his eyes off of the road in order to change his CD, which resulted in him running a red light and striking Susan with his motor vehicle. In addition, by not being attentive to the road while driving, Tommy breached his duty to drive in a safe manner on public roads, when he failed to look in ...