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.
Mental anticipation of a risk should play a critical role when deciding on the proximate cause of any accident. This is because a person may do something that s/he does not know whether it can cause an accident. The actions of the guard did not pose any risk to Palsgraf because he does not know what is in the package. In his mind, the package was harmless and could not hurt anybody. On the other hand, in the case of Lynch v. Fisher, the truck knew that parking the truck in the middle of the road had a very high possibility of causing an accident (Steenson, 2009).
These are just excerpts of essays for you to view. Please click on Order Now for custom essays, research papers, term papers, thesis, dissertations, case studies and book reports.