Bierczynski v. Rogers

Supreme Court of Delaware · 1968 · Torts
239 A.2d 218 (1968)
Updated
TortsNegligenceProximate CauseConcerted ActionAutomobile Racingconcurrent negligenceconcert of actionracing

Facts

Rogers was driving west on Lore Avenue with his daughter when he saw Bierczynski and Race coming eastbound down a hill at about 55 to 60 miles per hour in a 25 mile per hour zone, nearly side-by-side, with Race at one point in the westbound lane. Rogers stopped, but could not move because of a guard rail and lack of shoulder. Race pulled back behind Bierczynski near River Road, his car bottomed out, dust obscured it, and then it emerged, careened sideways at about 70 miles per hour, and struck Rogers' stopped car. Bierczynski stopped his own car in the eastbound lane about 35 feet from the impact and never physically contacted Rogers' vehicle.

Issue

Whether there was sufficient evidence for the jury to find that Bierczynski's conduct was a proximate cause of the collision, even though his car did not strike the plaintiffs, because he and Race may have been engaged in an improper speed competition on the highway. The appeal also raised whether counsel could argue racing and whether evidence that Rogers did not have Bierczynski arrested should have been admitted.

Rule

Speed competition in automobiles on a public highway is negligence because a reasonably prudent person would not engage in such conduct. As a general rule, participants in a motor vehicle race on a public highway act in concert and are concurrently negligent, so each is liable for injury to a non-participant resulting from the race regardless of which vehicle directly inflicts the injury.

🔒

See the holding & full analysis

Create a free KwikCourt account to unlock the rest of this brief — and practice the case.

  • The court's holding and reasoning
  • Doctrine tests, pitfalls & exam hypotheticals
  • 10 practice questions + 4 AI-graded essays on this case
Sign up free to see more →
Free sample · practice this case

Test yourself

One of 10 multiple-choice questions for this case. Pick an answer to see why.
On a two-lane public road in Columbus, Ohio, Devin Cole and Mateo Ruiz leave work together and accelerate side-by-side far above the speed limit for several blocks. Mateo loses control while trying to stay even with Devin and crashes into Nina Park's minivan; Devin never touches Nina's vehicle and stops safely ahead.

If Nina sues Devin for negligence, what is the strongest basis for holding Devin liable?

Explanation. The majority adopted the rule that participation in a motor vehicle race or deliberate speed competition on a public highway is negligence, and that participants act in concert. Each participant is liable to a non-participant for injuries resulting from the race, regardless of which vehicle directly caused the impact. Physical contact by the defendant's car is unnecessary.