Analyze this case using what you have learned from the chapter
FACTS
Four cars (A, B, C & D) pulled up to the four way stop at the corner of Fifth Street and Main Street in City, State. Car A and Car B pulled into the intersection at the same time and collided. Car A was headed north on Main Street and Car B was turning from westbound Fifth to go southbound on Main.
Driver A received no injuries at all but his car was damaged totaling about $800.00. Driver B received a broken left arm and left wrist. He had $2,000.00 in medical bills. He had no health insurance so none of that amount will be paid by insurance. Driver B’s car was also damaged totaling about $1,000.00.
There was a police report that indicated that both parties were equally at fault.
STATUTE
The law of State reads as follows:
“At a four way stop, the vehicle that comes to a complete stop first shall have the right of way to proceed first and all other vehicles shall yield to that vehicle.”
LAWSUIT
Driver B sued driver A in small claims court claiming that he was negligent for failing to yield the right of way. Driver B requested damages in the amount of $5,000.00 (the limit in small claims court), claiming $2,000.00 in medical bills, $1,000.00 to repair his vehicle and $2,000.00 for pain and suffering.
Driver A countersued driver B for $800.00 for damage to his car claiming that he was negligent for failing to yield the right of way.
At the trial, Driver A testified that he came to a complete stop first and therefore had the right of way. Driver C testified that he witnessed the accident and that Driver A did in fact come to a complete stop first and therefore had the right of way. Pedestrian also testified on behalf of Driver A indicating that he was watching the traffic so he could cross the street and he saw Driver A come to a complete stop first.
Driver B testified that he came to a complete stop first and therefore had the right of way. Driver D and his passenger also testified that they witnessed Driver B come to a complete stop first.
The police officer testified and said that the reason he said that both parties were at fault in his report is because he could not conclude at the scene which party failed to yield and that they both COULD have had time to stop prior to the collision.
What do you think the jury will decide based on what you have learned in the chapter 4? Analyze possible defenses to recovery.
the textbook is business law today and chapter four is about the intellectual property rights.