91快活林

Bava Kama 3:8

By :  Daniel Nevins 91快活林 Alum (Rabbinical School), Former Pearl Resnick Dean of The Rabbinical School and the Division of Religious Leadership, Adjunct Assistant Professor Posted On Jan 1, 2008 | Mishnat Hashavua

Who is liable in a rear-end collision?

砖谞讬 砖讜专讬诐 转诪讬诐 砖讞讘诇讜 讝讛 讗转 讝讛, 诪砖诇诪讬诐 讘诪讜转专 讞爪讬 谞讝拽 .砖谞讬讛诐 诪讜注讚讬诐, 诪砖诇诪讬诐 讘诪讜转专 谞讝拽 砖诇诐.讗讞讚 转诐 讜讗讞讚 诪讜注讚, 诪讜注讚 讘转诐 诪砖诇诐 讘诪讜转专 谞讝拽 砖诇诐, 转诐 讘诪讜注讚 诪砖诇诐 讘诪讜转专 讞爪讬 谞讝拽.讜讻谉 砖谞讬 讗谞砖讬诐 砖讞讘诇讜 讝讛 讘讝讛, 诪砖诇诪讬诐 讘诪讜转专 谞讝拽 砖诇诐.讗讚诐 讘诪讜注讚 讜诪讜注讚 讘讗讚诐, 诪砖诇诐 讘诪讜转专 谞讝拽 砖诇诐.讗讚诐 讘转诐 讜转诐 讘讗讚诐, 讗讚诐 讘转诐 诪砖诇诐 讘诪讜转专 谞讝拽 砖诇诐, 转诐 讘讗讚诐 诪砖诇诐 讘诪讜转专 讞爪讬 谞讝拽.专讘讬 注拽讬讘讗 讗讜诪专, 讗祝 转诐 砖讞讘诇 讘讗讚诐, 诪砖诇诐 讘诪讜转专 谞讝拽 砖诇诐.

If one is walking with a [ceramic] jug, and another with a [wood] beam, and this one鈥檚 jug breaks on that one鈥檚 beam, he [the beam holder] is exempt [from paying damages], because this one has the right to move, and that one has the right to move. If the beam-bearer was in front, and the jug-bearer behind him, and the jug breaks on the beam, the beam bearer is exempt. If the beam-bearer stopped [causing the jug to crash into him], then he is liable. But if the beam-bearer said, 鈥淪top,鈥� then he is exempt. If the jug bearer was first and the beam bearer was second, and the jug was broken by the beam, he [the beam-bearer] is liable. But if the jug-bearer stopped [causing the collision], then [the beam-bearer] is exempt. But if [the jug-bearer] said to the beam-bearer, 鈥淪top,鈥� [but the beam still crashed into the jug], then [the beam bearer] is liable. And likewise in the case of one carrying a lamp and the other carrying flax [which could be ignited by the lamp].

Comments

Bava Kama deals with matters of liability for damage caused by a person or his property. In this mishnah, the scene is a crowded thoroughfare where porters are carrying goods, some of them fragile. Our mishnah provides a thorough and fair standard for liability. Carriers of fragile goods are entitled to basic protections, but are not favored to the point that carriers of more durable items are saddled with excessive liability.

Question

In American law, the second car in a rear-end collision is presumed to be liable. Should it matter if the first car made a sudden stop, or are its brake lights equivalent to the mishnah鈥檚 shouted warning?