Replies

I can see any number of reasons why one drives over a pile of leaves, but the responsibility for any mishaps that occur is on the driver for not knowing what's in his path.

guy ran over my neighbor's cat. not his fault, the cat tried to run past as he was putting along (he WAS putting, 15 mph tops), and went splat. The guy took the cat to my neighbor, and accepted responsibility since he was the operator of the vehicle. not hsi fault, but his responsibility.

First, let's get our nomenclature straight. Sometimes you seem to use fault and responsibility interchangeably, and sometimes you keep them distinct. Your first example uses it in the context of fault, but your second example separates the two.

Negligence is fault. You've repeatedly said the guy has been negligent. You've consistently been finding fault.

If I tell you nobody is in the bathroom, and you open the door on them, were you negligent? I can think of several scenarios where the guy should have known there was a likelihood of kids in the leaves, and I can think of several where he could easily believe there wasn't such a likelihood. Both set of scenarios would be equally consistent with this thin article almost completely devoid of useful details.

Tell you what - why don't you just call the guy and get those missing details, so you can prove that you're correct in assessing his negligence?