Morley, I understand your frustration. People drive like shit in Taiwan, your daughter was hit by one of those lousy drivers, was scared and injured, and you’ve had to suffer the humiliation of losing at trial as well as having to pay $ to the jerk who hit your girl. I do feel for you.
And yes, the outcome sounds crazy the way you tell it. But, YC had a good point when he mentioned the concept of contributory negligence that often applies in courts in the US and elsewhere. Just because the other guy was on a motor vehicle and your daughter was on foot doesn’t necessarily absolve her of all responsibility. Here are excerpts from a few US cases that suggest the result may not be as crazy as it seems:
[quote]This is an action for alleged wrongful death brought by . . . the mother and sole surviving heir of one Carl Brown, an adult, who, while crossing East El Camino Avenue in North Sacramento shortly after midnight on the morning of May 16, 1945, was struck and killed by a car being driven by defendant Frank Fat. Defendant’s answer denied negligence and alleged contributory negligence. Plaintiff has appealed from the judgment entered . . . in favor of the defendant and from the order denying her motion for a new trial. . .
The record conclusively shows . . . that decedent was dressed in dark clothing; that he was not crossing at an intersection but was jaywalking, and therefore . . . was contributorily negligent. . .
The judgment and order from which appellant appeals are affirmed.[/quote]
online.ceb.com/CalCases/CA2/86CA2d823.htm
[quote]This is an appeal from a judgment for plaintiff. . . plaintiff was walking across East Twelfth Street in the city of Oakland near the middle of the block . . . near the center line of the street he was struck by an automobile . . . An ordinance of the city of Oakland prohibited pedestrians crossing this highway except at a crosswalk and plaintiff was admittedly violating the ordinance at the time of his injury. . .
. . .if plaintiff is himself guilty of continuing negligence without which the injury would not have occurred, and if as a person of ordinary prudence he should have foreseen that an injury of that character would be likely to result from his negligence, his continuing negligence is a proximate cause of his injury and will bar a recovery. . .
The judgment is reversed[/quote]
online.ceb.com/calcases/C2/11C2d255.htm
[quote]This is an appeal from a judgement for personal injuries. Plaintiff a resident and citizen of Wisconsin, was struck by defendant’s automobile and injured as he was crossing U.S. Highway No. 12 in front of his home. . .
Under the law of Wisconsin a plaintiff may recover when guilty of contributory negligence, if the defendant’s negligence has been established and plaintiff’s negligence is not as great as defendant’s. . .
At the point plaintiff crossed the highway there was no crosswalk, either marked or unmarked. Therefore, it was plaintiff’s absolute duty to yield the right-of-way to defendant and his failure to do so would be, under the law of Wisconsin, negligence as a matter of law. . .
The evidence was also sufficient to justify a finding that plaintiff was negligent in failing to keep a proper lookout. . . He looked to the east before he went onto the pavement but did not look again as he crossed the pavement. . .
When two persons are negligent and injury to one proximately results from the combined negligence of both, it must often be a very delicate and difficult question to decide whether the negligence of one was greater than that of the other, and contributed in a greater degree to produce the injury. . .[/quote]
jurisearch.com/newroot/casel … 01+F.2d+88
I don’t remember all the facts you reported in your case, and I don’t know what evidence was presented in court, but if the judge concluded based on the evidence presented that your daughter was 100% at fault, then it doesn’t seem crazy at all to deny her a recovery and hold her parents liable for the injury she caused.
I’m sorry to say that. It’s a sad story. But I guess the most important thing is that your daughter was not seriously injured or killed, and the most important lesson to be learned is for your daughter to be more careful in the future near the roads or sidewalks, with all the crazy reckless drivers in Taiwan. Seriously, I hope she learned that lesson.
No offense intended at all, but sometimes it’s best just to suck it up, gain whatever wisdom one can from the experience and move on.
