Cohen v. Petty

United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia · 1933 · Torts

TortsNegligenceAutomobile accidentsSudden illness while drivingnegligencesudden illnessautomobileunforeseeable incapacity

Facts

Plaintiff was riding in the back seat of defendant's automobile with her sister, while defendant drove and his wife sat in front. Near Four Corners on Colesville Pike, after passing through Silver Spring, defendant said he felt sick, and almost immediately the car left the road, struck a culvert abutment, and ran into a bank, injuring plaintiff. Plaintiff and her sister estimated the car's speed at roughly thirty-five to forty-five miles per hour, but plaintiff did not see what the driver did after hearing his wife exclaim, "What is the matter?" Defendant's wife testified that defendant suddenly fainted, his hand left the wheel, and she immediately grabbed the wheel; defendant testified he had never fainted before and had no reason to anticipate such an attack.

Issue

Was there sufficient evidence of actionable negligence to permit the case to go to the jury, or was the trial court justified in directing a verdict for the defendant where the uncontradicted evidence showed that defendant suddenly fainted without warning and thereby lost control of the car?

Rule

One who is suddenly stricken by an illness, which he had no reason to anticipate, while driving an automobile, and which renders it impossible for him to control the car, is not chargeable with negligence. Where the plaintiff shows no actionable negligence before the loss of control, and the defendant's positive and uncontradicted evidence shows the loss of control resulted from such sudden illness, any contrary inference of negligence must yield to the uncontradicted evidence of the actual events.

🔒

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

Free sample · practice this case

Test yourself

One of 10 multiple-choice questions for this case. Pick an answer to see why.

In Arlington, Virginia, Maya Torres accepted a ride from Daniel Kline to a neighborhood dinner. While driving on a broad, lightly traveled road at about 35 miles per hour, Daniel suddenly said, "I feel sick," lost consciousness within seconds, and the car drifted into a ditch, injuring Maya. Daniel and his passenger in the front seat both testify he had never fainted before and had no prior warning that day.

If Maya sues Daniel for negligent driving, which is the strongest conclusion?

Explanation. The majority rule is that a driver suddenly stricken by an illness he had no reason to anticipate, and which renders control of the car impossible, is not chargeable with negligence. Here the evidence shows sudden, unforeseeable incapacity and no actionable negligence before control was lost, so negligence cannot be based merely on the resulting crash.