Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site cae780.UUCP Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!decwrl!amd!resonex!cae780!gordon From: gordon@cae780.UUCP (Brian Gordon) Newsgroups: net.auto Subject: Re: who is at fault Message-ID: <425@cae780.UUCP> Date: Wed, 14-Nov-84 16:09:37 EST Article-I.D.: cae780.425 Posted: Wed Nov 14 16:09:37 1984 Date-Received: Sat, 17-Nov-84 03:09:38 EST References: <1026@hou5e.UUCP> Organization: CAE Systems Inc. Sunnyvale, Ca. Lines: 30 >The following is a description of an actual car accident to the best >of my knowledge: > The driver in car A was driving down the hump of a bridge at 11:45 pm. > It was raining and the road was very slippery. Car B, which was > in front of car A, braked suddenly for some unknown reason. > Trying to avoid a collision with car B, Car A skided and spun 90 degrees > before it finally stopped without hitting car B. Car C was at a great > distance behind car A and didn't see what happened because car C was > going up the hump of the bridge when car A went out of control. > As car C was coming down the bridge, car C didn't see car A because > car A was stopped sideways and no lights were visible to cat C. > When car C finally saw car A, it couldn't stop in time and > smashed into car A. Car B didn't stop after the accident. > Two more chain-reacted collisions occured behind car C. >QUESTION: > Which car (or cars) is LEGALLY responsible for the accident? > Naive answer: car C. Either the driver hit car a on purpose (which is illegal :-)) or was not under sufficient control (which is illegal). It sounds as if car c was "outdriving its headlights". As a practical matter, almost any driver in car c would have had the same problem, but it would still appear to be, legally, their fault. FROM: Brian G. Gordon, CAE Systems USENET: {ucbvax, ihnp4, decvax!decwrl}!amd!cae780!gordon {resonex, qubix, hplabs}!cae780!gordon USNAIL: 1333 Bordeaux Drive, Sunnyvale, CA 94089 AT&T: (408)745-1440 The license plate reads "BARI".