chapter 8

please solve this case for me please

1) he so-called "seat belt defense" is used by defense counsel to argue that the plaintiff was contribu- torily negligent or negligent per se in his failure to wear a seat belt. Assume you are representing a defendant in a motor vehicle accident case and argue (a) the plaintiff was contributorily negligent; (b) the plaintiff was comparatively negligent; (c) the plaintiff assumed the risk; (d) the plaintiff failed to mitigate his damages; and (e) the plaintiff was negligent per se. Be as specific as possible in terms of the type of legal argument you would want to make and the type of evidence that you would want to introduce. Would you rather argue that the plaintiff contributed to his own injuries or that he assumed the risk? Why? Now assume you are representing the plaintiff and want to argue that the seat belt defense is inappropriate. In your arguments consider whether the plaintiff has a duty to use a seat belt and whether his failure to do so constitutes the proximate cause of the accident. Furthermore, you might want to consider when the plaintiff 's duty to mitigate his damages arises.

2. Police officer left a handcuffed prisoner in the back seat of his police cruiser. The back seat was sepa- rated from the front seat by a Plexiglas shield. On the way to the jail, the officer stopped and exited the cruiser to assist with traffic control and left the keys in the ignition with the engine and emergency lights on. The prisoner somehow maneuvered into the front seat and drove away at a very high rate of speed, crashing head on into a vehicle and causing the death of both the driver of the other vehicle and himself. Should immunity be extended to the police officer and the City for the officer's gross negligence? Pile v. City of Brandenburg, 215 S.W.3d 36 (Ky. 2006).

Please help solve this case