Operating a Vehicle While Fatigued: Are You at Risk of a Lawsuit?

The plaintiff and defendant were going to Lowell, Massachusetts. The plaintiff began the drive and made several stops for beer and food. Shortly before the state line the plaintiff requested the defendant take the wheel so she could rest.

Prior to taking over the wheel, the defendant showed signs of fatigue. He dosed off a few times and made no attempt to wake himself before moving to the drivers seat to operate the vehicle. The accident occurred shortly after the defendant began to drive.

The accident occurred on April 14, 1963, when the plaintiff's car, driven by the defendant, crashed into a pole on the side of the freeway. As a result the plaintiff suffered severe injuries and subsequently died.

Procedural Facts:

The Trial Court found in favor of the defendant, the appellate court reversed the decision and remanded the case for a new trial.

Source/Rule of Law:

A person who falls asleep while in the operation of a motor vehicle is guilty of "ordinary negligence" (215), when the proper precautions have not been taken in order to prevent the driver from feeling tired or weary. 28 A.L.R.2d 12, 44 et seq.

Issue(s):

Whether the Trial Court erred in ruling in favor of the defendant in the negligent wrongful death case which requires that the driver of an automobile take reasonable actions to prevent oneself from falling asleep at the wheel.

Court Holding:

The initial decision by the Trial Court was made in error. The verdict in favor of the defendant is reversed and remanded for a new trial.

Court Reasoning/Rational:

Yes, the Trial Court failed to examine the evidence and properly apply it to the case at hand. Delong had prior knowledge that he felt tired when he took the wheel of the automobile, yet Delong took no action to further prevent himself from feeling the affects of fatigue prior to falling asleep at the wheel, even though he know himself to be tired. Ignoring the warning signs of fatigue and failing to take steps to prevent it constitutes negligence.

Concurring/Dissenting Opinions:

The court came to the proper decision concerning Keller v. Delong. A person who has been "dozing" while in the passengers seat has knowledge that they are tired and has an obligation to wake him or herself up before beginning to drive. However, the steps that are necessary to try to wake one up are unclear and not discussed. The question left in the decision is, what constitutes the necessary steps to prevent the feelings of fatigue, and would these steps, if taken, cover a driver who still falls asleep while driving? Negligence should not be limited to those who do not take proper steps to prevent fatigue, but also to those who fail to recognize the need to pull over the car and rest.