Plaintiff, 17 years of age, was injured when struck by an automobile driven by Defendant, also 17 years of age. The accident occurred before dawn, while Plaintiff was walking to work. The roadway was slippery due to ice and snow, and Plaintiff was required to walk in the roadway due to the presence of snow banks on both sides of the road. The Defendant dimmed his headlights upon the approach of another vehicle and did not see Plaintiff until he turned his high beams on and was about to hit Plaintiff. Plaintiff sued Defendant in negligence for: (1) driving at an excessive rate of speed; (2) having excessively worn tires on his automobile in violation of a state statute; and (3) driving a motor vehicle after his license to operate had been suspended. Defendant claimed that Plaintiff was contributorily negligent in walking on the right-hand side of the roadway (contrary to statute), in wearing dark clothing, and in failing to carry a light under the circumstances.
The fact that the Defendant was driving the automobile after his license had been suspended:
A. Establishes negligence as a matter of law.
B. May be considered by the jury in determining negligence.
C. Is not relevant.
D. Creates a rebuttable presumption of negligence.
{ 9 comments }
