|
Conger, MN | Agreed. There are far too many unknowns to determine percentages of fault at this point (at least based on what I've see in this thread).
Some situations come down to multiple parties get "stuck" with a percentage of the fault, in order to get the financial aspects of the civil case resolved.
Theoretically, if something like this went to a jury, it could allocate fault something like:
17 year old girl: 40% of total fault, for basic negligence
Girls parents: 20% of fault for "negligent entrustment"
one or both Nutrien drivers: 35% of fault for not taking appropriate precautions to allow vehicles to safely pass (or on Nutrien for not properly training the emplyoees)
Semi-driver: 5% for missing the opportunity to take evasive action. (Depending on state law, the use or non-use of a seatbelt could also be a factor. Many states don't allow the lack of a seatbelt to be presented to the jury.)
I do NOT mean to suggest at all that this is how it would actually play out. I am just giving a hypothetical example so people can give thought to whether blaming it totally on the girl at this point -- without knowing all of the facts -- is fair, or even logical. | |
|
Deadly Crash
