Court Opinion

ID: 9690401
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-24 19:11:08.339659+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:18:56.682350
License: Public Domain

DIXON, Justice
(dissenting).
I respectfully dissent.
The majority opinion finds Laird negligent (guilty of “criminal negligence”) and his negligence to be a “cause-in-fact” of the accident, but excuses him from civil liability because he owed no duty to Hare, the following motorist. Why ? Is it because Hare was more negligent than Laird? The majority only says that “under the circumstances” Laird did not owe Hare a duty to clear the highway, explaining that, although Hare was a member of the class (following motorists) to whom Laird owed the duty of clearing the highway, Laird did not, at this time and at this place, owe a duty to Hare!
What about the duty Laird owed his passenger? The following motorist and Laird’s passenger are not in the same situation. The majority does not discuss the duty the driver owes his passenger to avoid placing the passenger in a position of unnecessary peril. The majority finds that Laird placed his truck in a dangerous position, violating the statute which prohibits parking on the highway and which was designed, according to the majority, “to protect against the risk that a driver, whether cautious or inattentive, would collide with a stationary vehicle.”
Some explanation is needed for the evaporation of the duty which Laird owed to his passenger. The majority relieves Laird of all responsibility for her injury.
I agree that, as between Laird and Hare, Laird should recover. For the purposes of workability in solving tort cases, the opinion of the Court of Appeal (251 So.2d 73) in this case is preferable: Hare had the last clear chance; he is responsible.
But as between Laird and Mrs. Laird, it required the concurring negligence of Laird and Hare to cause her injury. Laird put his passenger in a place of danger, specifically prohibited by law, and his act, concurring with Hare’s negligence, caused the injury. Laird’s insurer should bear a portion of the responsibility for Mrs. Laird’s injury.