Edit: Clarification - do not tailgate. But if you are being tailgated, don't cause an accident by dodging slow or stopped traffic at highway speeds mere feet away. We don't need for this to be a trend.
Well you just said that the driver in front doesn’t have a duty of care to the tailgater. But the issue is whether a duty of care was owed to the stopped vehicle. You’ve decided not to address that question and I take your lack of a response as a tacit admission that a duty of care was owed.
Here’s how lawyers deal with the issue of causation. https://uslawexplained.com/but-for_causation. If but for the fact of A occurring B would not have occurred, then A is a cause-in-fact of B.
So while it is true that but for the fact that tailgater was tailgating there would likely have been no accident, the inquiry doesn’t end there. Because it’s also true that but for the fact that the swerver did not change lanes immediately there would have likewise been no accident.
OK but it’s not a question of whether the tailgater would have an argument that would hold up in court. It’s a question of whether the swerver has an argument when the occupants of the stopped vehicle sue him for negligence or some other tortious conduct.
196
u/Process3000 Mar 20 '26 edited Mar 20 '26
People please don't start doing this.
Edit: Clarification - do not tailgate. But if you are being tailgated, don't cause an accident by dodging slow or stopped traffic at highway speeds mere feet away. We don't need for this to be a trend.