Practice question
A driver facing sudden peril not caused by prior negligence makes a reasonable split-second choice. Later reflection suggests another choice might have been better. Under McKee, does the later alternative alone establish negligence?
- No; the emergency’s actual constraints must be assessed
- Yes; perfect hindsight is always required
- Yes; any imperfect result proves negligence
- Yes; reasonable reaction is irrelevant
- Yes; the driver must foresee every possible event
Legal references
- Civil Code RA386: https://lawphil.net/statutes/repacts/ra1949/ra_386_1949.html Articles1173,2178,2185.
- Picart v Smith GRL12219 March15,1918 MAIN: https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri1918/mar1918/gr_l-12219_1918.html Reasonable-person foreseeability test.
- McKee v IAC GR68102/68103 July16,1992 MAIN: https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri1992/jul1992/gr_68102_1992.html Emergency rule and own-negligence qualification.
Answer this question in flashcards to review your response and continue practicing.