Caleb is driving a car in which Duffy is a passenger when an accident occurs. Caleb and Duffy are emotionally rattled,but neither is physically hurt. Caleb is not liable to Dufy on a negligence theory because

Question

Quizplus · Accepted Answer

Negligence requires that the defendant had a duty of care, breached that duty, and caused harm to the plaintiff. In this case, Caleb did not intend to cause an accident, so he did not breach his duty of care. The fact that both parties were emotionally rattled or that Duffy was not injured does not negate the duty of care or breach of duty on Caleb's part. Additionally, comparative negligence is not applicable unless both parties had a role in causing the accident, which is not the case here.

Caleb Is Driving a Car in Which Duffy Is a Passenger