QUESTION 11

1. Bill was driving his car on the Beltway at rush hour. It was a cold evening and when it started to rain, the roads started to ice over. Bill figured he should go as fast as possible so as to limit the amount of time he would be on the road, thus, he reasoned, lessening his chance of getting into an accident. Suddenly, the car ahead of Bill starts to slow down very quicklly but since Bill is a good distance away, he figures he will be okay. After all, he is driving a late model, expensive car with all the latest safety equipment. Before Bill can even hit the brakes his car starts to slow down thanks to the collision avoidence system. But then the car hits a patch of ice and Bill suddenly sees why the man in front of him had been slowing down. Bill decides to take control, so he disables the collision avoidance system and starts pumping the brakes. Unfortunately for Bill, the car is equipped with anti-lock brakes as are all modern cars, and so his pumping of the brakes causes the car to go into an uncontrolled skid rather than slowing down. He rear-ends the car in front of him and suffers various injuries in the collision. After an exahuastive search of the owner's manual and all the literature he can find on the manufacturer's web site, Bill thinks he has an airtight case of failure to warn product liability. He will sue the manufacturer.

   What will be the result?

   		Bill will win. The judicial trend is towards greater liability so the court will find the car maker liable for Bill's injuries since they made a car where the driver was allowed to take control and hurt himself in the process.
   		Bill will lose. A company is not required to warn of obvious dangers and driving a car fast on ice and then disabling the safety features that could have kept the driver safe are obvious dangers.
   		This case is too close to call. Afrter all, car makers are required to warn of any and all potential dangers to a driver, which is probably why it is so hard to read the manual these days. But since there was ice, who knows?

2. QUESTION 12

3. Beth is rear-ended in a traffic accident by John who was driving too close. She sues and is awarded the following:

   $10,000 for medical expenses;

   $10,000 for lost wages;

   $25,000 for a new car;

   $30,000 for emotional distress and mental anguish.

   How much of this would be considered compensatory damages

   		$10,000
   		$45,000
   		$40,000
   		$75,000