Citation

Hofstadter SH. Ann. Am. Acad. Polit. Soc. Sci. 1960; 328(1): 53-60.

Affiliation

Supreme Court of New York

Copyright

(Copyright © 1960, SAGE Publishing)

DOI

10.1177/000271626032800107

PMID

unavailable

Abstract

Automobile accidents have kept pace with the steadily rising highway use. In a real sense these are not caused by man but by the automobile itself. When the blow strikes, the complainant can obtain redress only by proving the opera tor careless. But if his own negligence contributed in any way, he may not be recompensed, whatever the fault of the operator. These rules are so harsh that juries circumvent them, trial of these cases is largely a matter of chance, the courts are jammed, justice is delayed, and many accident victims are denied reim bursement. Alternative theories predicated on fault are more sound but miss the heart of the problem. The solution lies in granting compensation on a prearranged schedule regardless of fault—as in workmen's compensation. If immediate adoption of such a plan is not possible, automobile cases should in the interim be assigned to special tribunals consisting of a judge, a layman and a physician, with apportionment of damages sub stituted for the rule of contributory negligence. In the era of the automobile, no victim of its thrust should be required to carry the burden of his pain and suffering alone.

Language: en