Reference no: EM133250131
Assignment - Description - Jim owned a used car that he wished to sell. It was a 1985 Honda Accord with 120,000 miles on it. The odometer stopped a couple years ago. The odometer showed 95,000 miles on the car. Jim recently had the odometer repaired. The car had been wrecked at one point, but that damage had been repaired as well. Jim bought the car used.
Jim offered the car for sale in an ad which stated: "For sale, 1995 Honda Accord, 110,000 miles, one owner, in great shape. Price is $5,000."
Sue bought the car from Jim for the asking price of $5,000 after taking it for a test drive.
As she was driving the car 2 weeks later, Sue struck Lisa's car from behind when Sue didn't see Lisa's car slowing. Sue was texting. Just before the accident, Lisa slowed her car to 10 miles per hour below the posted speed limit for no particular reason.
Lisa suffered a "whiplash" injury to her neck. She also suffered damage to the rear bumper of her car, which could be repaired.
Sue suffered no injuries, but did suffer some damage to her bumper.
Questions -
(1) What tort claims does Lisa have against Sue, if any? Explain the basis briefly.
(2) What defense(s) would Sue assert and why? Explain the basis briefly.
(3) Does Sue have any tort claims against Jim? What claims?
1. Lisa has the tort claims of negligence because Sue was on her phone texting, which is against the law and put others drivers at risk and in this case was probably the main cause of the accident.
2. Sue would try to get comparative negligence and argue that it is a case of comparative negligence because slowing down ten miles under the speed limit is unsafe and there was no reason to do that and argue that Lisa was also at fault.
3. Sue has a case against Jim for fraud and could ask for some money back on the car because he misrepresented how many miles were actually on it, so the car was actually worth less and maybe argue about the the shape that the car was in if Jim did not disclose that the car was in an accident.
The second response
1. Lisa has a negligence claim against Sue, given the accident was Sue's fault. If she had been paying closer attention to the road and not her phone then we probably wouldn't be in the situation. Sue should be held responsible for all damages on Lisa's end.
2. In my opinion, the only defense Sue would be able to assert would be the fact that Lisa slowed her speed to 10 mph under the speed limit, for no apparent reason. This seems to be the only valid defense that Lisa has.
3. Sue does not have any tort claims against Jim. Once Lisa bought the vehicle from Jim, She is now fully responsible for the actions taken place in the car. Their terms of the agreement were not breached and all responsibility is on Lisa in the scenario.