Question

Phillip was waiting for a bus at a bus stop. Across the street and down the block, a mechanic negligently overinflated a tire he was intending to put onto Marsha’s pickup truck. The exploding tire injured Marsha and frightened a neighborhood dog, which ran down the street and knocked Phillip down, injuring his knee. Phillip sued the mechanic. In applying the concept of proximate causation as explained in the decision of Palsgraf v. Long Island Railroad Co. to this case, Phillip would

Answer 1

Answer: He is more likely to lose the case.

Step-by-step explanation:

Philip is likely to lose because eventhoug the mechanic's action or conduct was an act of negligence toward Marsha, it was not a proximate causation in relation to Phillip, who was far away.

Proximate causation means it was not the primary cause of his injury , the mechanic could have not predicted or foreseen that Philip was going to be injured buy a running dog and that frees him from a duty to Philip.