Question

Conner was driving his truck when a board fell out of the truck bed and onto the road. Krista, who was driving behind Conner's truck, tried to avoid the board, swerved and struck a telephone pole, causing her severe injuries. Which of the following is correct?

a) Conner is not liable for Krista's injuries because it was an unforeseeable accident.
b) Conner is liable for Krista's injuries as the proximate cause of the accident.
c) Krista is solely responsible for her injuries due to her swerving.
d) Conner is not liable because he did not directly cause Krista's injuries.

Answer 1

Conner is likely liable for Krista's injuries as the proximate cause of the accident. Negligence and duty to secure items in the truck bed are relevant legal concepts in this case.

Step-by-step explanation:

In the scenario described, Conner is likely liable for Krista's injuries as the proximate cause of the accident. Proximate cause refers to a cause that directly leads to an event or injury, and in this case, Conner's board falling out of the truck bed was the direct cause of Krista swerving and hitting the telephone pole.

Under the legal concept of negligence, Conner had a duty to secure the items in his truck bed to prevent them from falling out. Since the board fell out, causing Krista's injuries, it is foreseeable that such an incident could lead to accidents and injuries.

Therefore, option b) Conner is liable for Krista's injuries as the proximate cause of the accident is correct. It is important for drivers to properly secure their cargo to prevent accidents and injuries on the road.