Zeni v Anderson PDF

Preview

Summary

example of a breid for class...

Description

Negligence per se

238-243 Zeni v. Anderson Supreme Court of Michigan (1976)

Facts: Zeni, a nurse, was walking to work in the snow. Instead of using the dangerous snow-covered sidewalk, she walked on the well-used pedestrian snowpath, with her back to oncoming traffic. Anderson hit her with her car, causing Zeni to suffer from intra-cerebral subdural hematoma which required neurosurgery and subsequent retrograde amnesia. Eyewittness stated Anderson could probably not see out of her car, though she said she scraped her windshield and put on defroster. At trial, a security officer testified that it was common for nurses to use the path Zeni had, as it was safer than the sidewalk. Procedural Posture: Defendant claimed Zeni’s failure to use the sidewalk constituted contributory negligence under the statute. Verdict for plaintiff at trial court. Court of appeals reversed. Court of appeals reversed and trial court is affirmed. Issue: Is a snow-covered sidewalk an excuse to rebut the presumption of negligence resulting from violating a statute prohibiting one from walking on the main road if a sidewalk is provided? Holding/Rule:  The proper role of a penal statute which has been found to apply to a particular set of facts establishes only a prima facie case which may be rebutted but showing an adequate excuse under the circumstances Reasoning:  Court didn’t adopt negligence per se because it is actually closer to strict liability  Adopted that a presumption may be rebutted by an adequate excuse under the circumstances  Zeni did not take the sidewalk due to it being dangerous and made a reasonable choice to go on the safer pedestrian path. Her path was supposed to be safer if not for Anderson’s negligence in operating her vehicle. Zeni successfully rebutted the presumption under a reasonable excuse....