Business Law

George leased a car from Hertz. Unknown to Hertz, George let Ida drive the car on the trip from the rental place to the Omni hotel in downtown Durham, NC because George was very tired. Ida drove negligently and caused an accident in front of NCCU in which Robert was injured.

If Robert sues hertz, under which theory or theories of law will he bring the suit, and what rules of law will he use to help him win? What rules of law will Hertz use to defend itself? Who will win?

The court will likely find that Hertz is not guilty of contributory negligence by way of negligent entrustment and therefore not liable to Robert for damages caused by the negligent driving of Ida.

Negligent entrustment is a cause of action that arises where one party is held liable for negligence because they negligently provided another party, whom they should have known to be an incompetent or reckless driver with a dangerous instrument, and the entrusted party caused injury to a third party with that instrument. The cause of action most frequently arises where one person allows another to drive their car.

For example, in Swicegood v. Cooper , 341 NC 178 (1995), This is an action for damage to personal property which occurred in an automobile accident. The evidence showed there was a collision between the plaintiff's automobile, being driven by his son Reggie Swicegood, and the defendant's van which she was driving. The plaintiff had given his son permission to drive the automobile on this occasion. Reggie Swicegood also drove the vehicle on several previous occasions. The Swicegood was found liable to Cooper for negligent entrustment because he gave his son permission to drive his van after the son had subsequently been convicted of six speeding violations, three safe movement violations, and had his license suspended for sixty days for accumulating more than twelve driving license points between 1986 and 1991. Cooper should have known that her