McPheters v. Peterson

I dissent from the majority’s conclusion that the district court did not err in refusing to instruct the jury concerning the standard of care an automobile operator owes to a pedestrian and an adult owes to a child. Those instructions were vital in properly informing the jury of the requisite standard of care Mr. Peterson owed Aaron McPheters.

The instruction the district court used to instruct the jury with respect to the “standard of care” due in this case reads as follows: “The words ‘ordinary care’ mean the care a reasonably careful person would use under the circumstances similar to those…