Maricopa Case

Maricopa Case

1. Terry Was Speeding?

   • Terry didn't slow down when approaching the school intersection.
     • Generally, drivers slow down when approaching school intersections.
       • People reduce their speed in school intersections to avoid accidents due to heavy traffic and pedestrian crossings
         • Terry was driving negligent relative to reasonable driving because his speed didn't allow him to safely avoid a fatal accident

2. Terry is a distracted driver

   • When Terry saw Pat, he slammed on the breaks.
     • Generally, when one slams on their breaks, this means they were not expecting an event to occur.
       • One can assume that Terry wasn't focusing on what he was doing

3. Terry reached over to grab a CD causing his vision to deviate from the road

   • As a general rule, taking your eyes off the road for any period of time increases the chance for an accident.
     • This in turn increased the risk of Terry hitting something or someone
       • Terry should've known the risk due to his prior driving experience

4. Jane was not wearing her seatbelt

   • She died because not wearing her seat belt enabled her to fly out of the car causing her inevitable death
     • Wearing her seat belt might have prevented her from being launched from the accident
       • The State requires that a seat belt be worn
   • Jane was partially responsible for her death
     • Social construct dictates that wearing a seat belt is significantly safer than not wearing a seat belt
       • It's reasonable that wearing a seat belt is the wise thing to do

5. Pat didn't cross at the cross walk

   • There wasn't a cross walk near the school
     • Generally a county is responsible for inputting crosswalks around a school
       • Typically crosswalks reduce the risk of pedestrian accidents
         • The chances of the incident being as severe are significantly decreased if a crosswalk was in place

6. The Suzuki had a high risk of roll over

   • The vehicle was not reliable during sharp turns
     • Another vehicle would not have rolled over so easily
       • In 2008, a judge ruled against Toyota for making a vehicle that had an unstable accelerator
         • Vehicle manufacturers are responsible for the safety of their consumers by making vehicles that are safe and reliable
           • Suzuki is partially responsible for making an unsafe vehicle that was susceptible to rolling over