A ninety-year-old patient walked away from a nursing home and wandered onto some nearby railroad tracks. Once on the tracks, the patient stumbled and sprained his ankle. A few minutes later a train approached. The engineer saw the man on the track and could have stopped, but the train's brakes were defective. As a result, the train hit and killed the man. His family is suing the railroad for negligence in a state that follows the contributory negligence doctrine. In this case,
A) the patient has assumed the risk of wandering onto the railroad tracks.
B) because the patient was contributorily negligent, the railroad has no liability.
C) the train had the last clear chance to avoid the accident, so the patient's contributory negligence does not bar his estate's recovery.
D) the train's striking of the man was an intervening cause, so the railroad company was negligent.
Correct Answer:
Verified
Q83: What is the reasonable person standard? How
Q84: Identify the elements a plaintiff must prove
Q85: Which of the following is a defense
Q86: In responding to the previous question (Question
Q87: Jack is a trucker who makes his
Q89: A principal factor that the courts consider
Q90: Garnett, who was driving too fast for
Q91: Under the Second Restatement, the duty of
Q92: Which of the following are activities that
Q93: Assume you are the judge in the
Unlock this Answer For Free Now!
View this answer and more for free by performing one of the following actions
Scan the QR code to install the App and get 2 free unlocks
Unlock quizzes for free by uploading documents