Cohen v. Petty
Court of Appeals of the District of Columbia, 1933

Material Facts: Defendant (Petty) driving car at speeds 35-45 mph. Defendant suddenly fainted causing car to swerve off of the road into an embankment. Defendant was in good health, had felt fine all day had no reason to believe he would faint, had never fainted before. Did not feel sick until moments before fainting.

Procedural History: Plaintiff filed suit alleging Petty failed to “exercise reasonable care” in operation of car, drove at reckless speeds. Case was dismissed by trial judge, without being sent to a jury, finding defendant was not at fault

Issue: Can the driver who has no history of fainting and no reason to believe he would faint be held liable for negligence?

Holding: Defendant had no reason to foresee that he would suddenly faint, therefore he did not show a lack of due care and is not liable for negligence.

Rule: In order for a defendant to be held liable for negligence, s/he must have been able to foresee the injury to the plaintiff as a result of his/her failure to exercise due care.

Reasoning: Plaintiff failed to show actionable negligence before the care left the road, and therefore would be insufficient to sustain an action for negligence. The law undoubtedly will not hold a defendant liable for a sudden fainting which he had no reason to predict. It was this sudden fainting that caused the car to swerve off the road, no reason for defendant to expect this injury.

Judgment: Order of lower court dismissing the case is affirmed.