For the purposes of protecting the safety of the traveling public as well as furthering public interest, the FAA has the power of issuing an emergency order to forbid a pilot from operating a specific flight if the aircraft has a particular pilot or pilots or to suspend the certificate of a pilot so as to maximize the safety of flight of civil aircraft. This can be achieved either verbally or in writing.
Andrews a, the dissenting judge in the case of Palsgraf, argues that the actions of a person should be related to what happens in the vicinity of that person’s actions and the time it takes for the effect of that action to be realized.
The above is not what happened in Lynch v. Fisher, because if the driver of the truck could have been more careful by parking the truck off the road then the accident could not have occurred. Since everyone ought to be responsible for his actions, the driver of the truck through his insurance should have been held responsible. However, Gunter’s actions cannot be held responsible for the wound that were suffered by the plaintiff because Gunter was in a delirium that was caused by the accident. Although, Gunter should have been more careful by driving carefully, he could not have caused an accident if the truck was not parked at the middle of the road.
In the case of Lynch v. Fisher, it is of paramount importance to note that the state of mind of Mr. Gunter, which was caused by the accident, led to him injuring an innocent person. If the accident had not occurred, which was caused by the negligence of the truck driver, and then Gunter would not have short the plaintiff. However, since the truck driver causes the accident, the plaintiff chose to sue the insurance company of the truck because the truck was the proximate cause of the accident (Surhone, Timpledon, & Marseken, 2010).
Iara Quintana, Plaintiff-Appellant, was knocked down by a vehicle as she crossed a street that did not have street lighting. The city of Chicago was found not to have done anything wrong because the causal of the accident was not entirely on the inoperative traffic lights. The inoperative traffic lights were a just a condition that could have led to an accident but things were made different by the conduct of the drivers.
On the other hand, in the case of Brian Quirke, as the plaintiff and the city of Harvey as the defendant, an accident occurred because the traffic lights were not lit. However, although the supplier had switched off the lights, the driver of the jeep that was carrying Quirke did not slow down although he had noticed that the traffic lights were inoperative. Although the fact that the traffic lights were off, was just a condition that could have led to the accident it could not be a proximate cause of the accident. The driver of the vehicle, Michael Cain should have realized that the lights were off and as a result, take actions to ensure that chances of an accident were limited by, for example driving slowly.