contestada

Beth is a passenger in a car that Caleb is driving when an accident occurs. Both Caleb and Beth are emotionally rattled, but neither is physically hurt. Caleb is not liable to Beth on a negligence theory because: a) both parties were emotionally rattled. b) Beth was not injured. c) Caleb apparently did not intend to cause an accident. d) Beth must have been comparatively negligent.

Respuesta :

fatimakincsem

The correct answer would be option B.

Beth was not Injured.

Explanation:

Negligence theory is a theory that talks about the failure of exercising the amount of care a person can show that a person with ordinary wisdom would have exercised in the same circumstances, situations or conditions.

So in this given example, when Caleb was driving a car and Beth was sitting with him, they met an accident. They both were emotionally rattled but non of them got hurt.

So according to negligence theory, Caleb is not liable to Beth, because Beth was not injured or hurt physically. If he would have hurt or injured due to the negligence of Caleb, then Caleb was responsible and liable to Beth.

Learn more about Negligence theory at:

https://brainly.com/question/8098652

#LearnWithBrainly

Otras preguntas