Final answer:
Dill may recover the cost of repairs if Bette did not act as a 'reasonable person', which is the standard used in negligence cases to determine responsibility. If Bette's behavior was below this standard when she collided with Dill's car, Dill could be entitled to compensation.
Step-by-step explanation:
Dill may recover the cost of repair if Bette failed to act as a reasonable person. In the context of law and negligence, a reasonable person is a legal standard that represents how an average person would responsibly act in a similar situation. When Bette backed out of the City Parking Garage and collided with Dill's car, causing damage, the question is whether Bette acted with the level of care that a reasonable person would have exercised under the same circumstances. If Bette is found to have acted below this standard of care, Dill may have grounds to recover the costs of repair.
In such cases, insurance typically plays a role in covering the costs associated with car accidents. However, if the responsible party is either uninsured or underinsured, the victim may need to seek compensation through legal means. Examples of acting below the standard of care could include failing to check mirrors, ignoring rear-view cameras if available, or being distracted by a phone or other device while backing up.