The delivery truck driver
The delivery truck driver ignores stopping in time consequently hitting a pedestrian injuring him seriously. Pedestrian had seen the red green indicating that it is not safe to cross the road. At the same time the driver was accelerating so as to move on a green light. Due to negligence pedestrian could not wait until green light appears to allow them to walk but due to negligence. Pedestrians should understand that they have the responsibility of protecting others as well as avoiding careless acts. The act of walking while the delivery truck was passing and without permission resulted to the accidents. On the other hand the driver should have understood that any time they are on the road they have to take care of people outside .He would have observed and seen the pedestrian and slowed down or stop to a void injuring the pedestrian.
In the court situation it would be argued that it is not the driver’s role to check on the people crossing the road as long as there green light it means that nobody should walk. It shows that the driver was doing it following the right way. The driver should show some care irrespective of the fat that the pedestrian was in wrong and could have not done the walk in front of the truck.
The pedestrian also should take care of the driver and always walk when permitted by the walk lights sine failure to observe could result to dangers to both the driver and the pedestrians. Both pedestrian and delivery driver are supposed to keenly observe the laws and rules of the road and observe all the signals and lights while using public roads. Walking out in red light caused abused the pedestrian breach their standards of care, this results to anxiety to the driver resulting to the accident.
The plaintiff in this case is the pedestrian because he was injured by a delivery truck. The defendants in the same as would be the truck driver and his employer the vicariously liable. Accordingly the pedestrians are liable for his way off acting negligently. The plaintiff case can be taken to court due to the fact that the defendant has committed a tort. There will be non-pecuniary cost sine the plaintiff will have medical expenses and rehabilitation expenses based on the level of injury. The court could as well come up with finding that the non-pecuniary damage an as well cover lost pleasure, lost wages as well as travel expenditure and rehabilitation.
The plaintiff received loss of income in future based on the level of injuries there would be loss of time at work accumulating medical expenses .Much of responsibility would lie upon the pedestrian because they ignored the red lights and opted to walsk.At the same time the driver has the responsibility to be in control of the truck, somehow can be said to be negligent. The court could reduce the plaintiff damages because he has injuries .The pedestrians were responsible for his injuries .the driver would use negligence contribution of the pedestrian as a defense while in court if sued by the pedestrian. There is possibility of the jury concluding that it was the pedestrian contribution negligence that caused their injury and this would reduce the award of personal responsibility.
The company that the delivery driver works for will be liable for any damage caused as per the tort the driver did. Although the driver was not negligent automatically their employer is liable for any tort the driver commits since they were on duty covered by vicarious liability. The employer is responsible for taking care of the damages caused by the driver to the plaintiff. The employer should be liable to cover their employees caused damages through risk management plan. Based on the type of the liability insurance that the company has the employer will be able to cover the reward to be received by the plaintiff this can be partial or full liability. (Ch. 3, 3-1a)