Raymond was waiting for a bus at a bus stop. Across the street and down the block, a mechanic negligently overinflated a tire he was intending to put onto Jan's pickup truck. The exploding tire injured Jan and frightened a neighborhood dog, which ran down the street and knocked Raymond down, injuring his knee. Raymond sued the mechanic. In applying the Palsgraf v. Long Island Railroad Co. decision to this case, Raymond would:

Raymond was waiting for a bus at a bus stop. Across the street and down the block, a mechanic negligently overinflated a tire he was intending to put onto Jan's pickup truck. The exploding tire injured Jan and frightened a neighborhood dog, which ran down the street and knocked Raymond down, injuring his knee. Raymond sued the mechanic. In applying the Palsgraf v. Long Island Railroad Co. decision to this case, Raymond would:

Raymond was waiting for a bus at a bus stop. Across the street and down the block, a mechanic negligently overinflated a tire he was intending to put onto Jan's pickup truck. The exploding tire injured Jan and frightened a neighborhood dog, which ran down the street and knocked Raymond down, injuring his knee. Raymond sued the mechanic. In applying the Palsgraf v. Long Island Railroad Co. decision to this case, Raymond would:



a. win because the mechanic was negligent in overinflating the tire, which led to Raymond's injury.
b. win because the court would apply the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur.
c. lose because, although the mechanic's conduct was negligent toward Jan, it was not a wrong in relation to Raymond, who was far away. The mechanic could not have foreseen injury to Raymond and therefore had no duty to him.
d. win based on negligence per se.








Answer: C


Learn More :

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)