Question

Questions 1-5 pertain to the Golden v. McCurry (1980). In this legal dispute, the plaintiff Golden sues McCurry for injuries sustained as a result of McCurry hitting Golden with his automobile while Golden was crossing the highway. Suppose that Golden demands $10,000 in compensation for medical bills and foregone wages.

Question 1

What elements need to be present in order for the injury to constitute a tort under the doctrine of simple negligence? Note that you need to select ALL required elements in order to obtain credit.

Multiple answers: You can select more than one option

A Harm must have occurred.

B The injurer must have been present at the time of the injury.

C The injurer must be a proximate cause of the harm.

D The injurer must have acted in a reckless manner.

E A potential for harm must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt.

F The injurer must have acted negligently and breached a duty of care that is reasonable in this situation.

G The injured party must prove no negligence on his/her part.

Question 2

HomeworkUnanswered

Fill in the Blanks

Top of Form

Suppose that the legally set speed limit was 50 mph and McCurry was driving at 70 mph. Under the doctrine of simple negligence, McCurry is (liable/not liable) for Golden's injuries. The appropriate monetary compensation for the injury is .

Bottom of Form

Question 3

HomeworkUnanswered

Fill in the Blanks

Top of Form

McCurry argued in court that Golden’s own negligence contributed to his injuries since he was crossing a road on which no pedestrians were allowed and was not exercising reasonable care. If Golden contributed to the accident, under the doctrine of contributory negligence, McCurry is (liable/not liable) for Golden’s injuries. The appropriate compensation for the injury is .

Answer 1

ans 1

option F and G

which means McCurry is at fault and golden was not negligent

ans 2

option liable...because McCurry was driving fast... compenstion $10000 is appropraite

ans 3

option not liable.... because Both are at fault and this is the case of doctrine of contributory negligence

compensation will be calculated on the basis of how much is the fault of injured... if he is on 30% at fault , then compensation will be reduced by 30%.(example)

that is compensation will be equal to (100-30)% of $10000 = $7000