Harvey is riding his bicycle, no-handed and at a very fast speed, ...

[Pineapplelove6]

Harvey is riding his bicycle, no-handed and at a very fast speed, down a park path. Trish, a jogger, accompanied by her dog Spot, who is leashed, is approaching Harvey from the other direction. Because he knows that he is bigger and faster on his bike, Harvey expects Trish to move out of his way. But Trish does not and, as Harvey passes her, he side-swipes Trish, knocking her to the ground and injuring her. Spot is inadvertently released when Trish falls, and he runs off into the road. Monty is driving carefully down the road. Seeing Spot running into his path, Monty drives off the road and onto the sidewalk, damaging his wheel alignment when he crosses the curb. Grandma Jenkins is babysitting young Elvis, his grandson. Elvis is playing hopscotch on the sidewalk. Fortunately, Monty's veering car stops far short of Elvis, and the boy is uninjured. Unfortunately, Grandma Jenkins, observing the car veering off the road and heading straight for her grandson, suffers a heart attack.
 
  Is Harvey liable, in negligence, for Grandma Jenkins's heart attack? Why or why not?

Question 2

Heart balm statutes have been enacted by states to preserve the common law heart balm actions.
 
  Indicate whether the statement is true or false

[manuelcastillo]

Answer to Question 1

Harvey is not liable because the element of causation is lacking. While Harvey was the cause in fact of Grandma Jenkins's injury (he started in motion the events that eventually led to Grandma Jenkins's injury), proximate cause is missing because Grandma Jenkins's heart attack was not the foreseeable consequence of the original risk of harm created by Harvey's unreasonable conduct (riding his bike fast and no-handed down the park path).

Answer to Question 2

false