CASE: Someone driving and talking on their cellphone. They drive into the car in front of them, which hits the car in front of THEM.
THE LAW: Rabbi Marshmallow says that the cellphone driver is obligated to pay for the damages.
LENIENT OR NOT: The person is talking on the phone because his wife is having problems breathing.
REASON: If he does not call (911) his wife might die.
ATTACK: How do we decide if it was a life-threatening circumstance for his wife?
STRICT (MORE OR LESS):
strict: what if the person he hits ends up dying? (from the accident)
less: It is a life threatening circumstance or she has passed out.
Julie and Sarah Q. and Leah wish you HAPPY CHANUKAH!!!! (today's Leah's birthday!!!)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
13 comments:
That is a very well thought out dillemma i must say. hehe. but i think it was the guy drivings fault he shouldve pulled over to speak on his cell
ok
first-if he was just talking, not because of a life threatening circumstance, the driver should pay.
second-he should pay anyway but depending on how harsh the accident is. for example, if the person has to be hospitalized, he is obligated to pay up to 3/4's of the bill. if the person died, then he should do what the family asks to repay them (like in whirligig)
If the person wasnt badly injured, he shouldnt have to pay because he was saving a life in the first place
Happy Chanukah to you too and Happpy birthday Leah
but nadine-what if he was on his way to pick her up to take her to the hospital and he had to get there as soon as possible?
he shouldn't be driving. he should be with his wife
What if he had bluetooth and had both hands on the wheel?
OK. what we were saying is that his wide in IN the car with him and he was on the phone w/911 because she stopped breathing.
Nadine- I understand your point but what if there was no where to pull over or if the person who was having an emergency was in the car and haveing a heart attack or what not, then what would happen?
Max- they were in the car when his wife stopped breathing.
Eytan- the reason he ran into the car in front of him was BECAUSE he wasn't using a blue-tooth.
rabbi MMMMMMMMMMichael says that the guy on his phone might wont to slooow down wen he toks on teh phone or pull over but anyway the cellphone guy has2 pay for the damages (even the car infront of teh other car)
ML
WH
Sarah, if you were to help us post this, then you would KNOW that the reason the man was on his phone was because his wife who was IN THE CAR WITH HIM was having breathing problems. There is no controversy. he had to be IN the car and he had to be ON the phone. no exceptions.
he shouldn't be driving
Post a Comment