Topics Covered in Exam: torts A

• Negligence
• Fact Pattern Details:
  • Marry took her 6-year-old son Jimmy to a public park.
  • Incident involving Zach throwing a ball over Timmy's head.
  • Timmy ran into the street and was hit by a car.
  • The statue prohibits electronic device usage while driving.
  • John, the driver, did not see Timmy.
  • Sally, another driver, hit John's car.

1. Changes if Marry Sues for Her Son: John Timmy

• Negligence
  • statutory violation - John's negligence due to texting while driving. - duty of care owed while driving.
  • Marry had a standard duty of care to her 6-year-old son Timmy.
  • Timmy was playing with Zach in the park.
  • Jimmy ran out of the park unnoticed by Marry.
  • Had Marry been watching, she could have prevented Jimmy from running into the street.

1. Charges if Marry Sues for Herself in Case of Collision:

• Bring up IIED but not valid argument (no intention)
• Assault
• Contributory negligence
  • Had Marry been watching, she could have prevented Jimmy from running into the street.
• Cardozo's View: The duty of due care is owed only to those in the foreseeable zone of danger

1. Charges if John Sues Sally in Case of Collision:
   • John is suing Sally for $20,000 in damages.
   • Contributory negligence

• John suffered a broken leg.
• Comparative or contributory negligence considered.
  • John's negligence due to texting while driving added to his injuries.

Additional Case Details:

• Marry's Duty of Care to Timmy:
  • Marry had a standard duty of care to her 6-year-old son Timmy.
  • Timmy was playing with Zach in the park.
  • Jimmy ran out of the park unnoticed by Marry.
  • Had Marry been watching, she could have prevented Jimmy from running into the street.

Legal Issues Discussed:

• Contributory negligence and statutory violation
• John's negligence due to texting while driving.
• Marry's possible apprehension of fear (assault) combined with her negligence.
• Types of damages (general, special, assault, battery, IIED)