04-28-2016, 12:53 PM
(04-28-2016, 12:29 PM)BFritz21 Wrote: I know what the jury based the ruling on because they told the judge after the trial. The ruling was incorrect because it was that we could have wrecked anywhere, when we only wrecked in the cemetery because he was speeding, which he only did because there were no other cars, traffic laws, or chances of being caught because cops weren't allowed back there, and not to mention that nowhere else would have had streets as narrow, dark, or windy as the cemetery, not to mention nothing like a headstone that we could clip. The cemetery was also only a hundred yards from his neighborhood on a straight highway, so no chance or wrecking there, either. Thanks, call me out more.
Unfortunately there was no proof that the driver would not have exceeded the speed limit or wrecked on the public road. it happens all the time with drunk drivers.
If the driver was willing to operate the vehicle in a dangerous manner in a cemetery then it is very likely that he would have been willing to do the same on a public road also. A driver is either safe or he is not. The driver was stupid or else intoxicated to the point that his judgement was impaired. Neither one of those things would have changed when he reached the public road.
If the road in the cemetery was safe to drive on under normal conditions then they could not be held at fault for a drunk person driving too fast on it. If there was some huge hole or dangerous defect in the cemetery road then they might have been at fault, but if the road was safe then they were not at fault.
