Pedestrian Follows Google Map, Gets Run Over, Sues

Hugh Pickens writes "The Toronto Star reports that a Utah woman is suing Google for more than $100,000 in damages, claiming its maps function gave her walking directions that led her onto a major highway, where she was struck by a car. Lauren Rosenberg sought directions between two addresses in Utah about 3 kilometers apart and the top result suggested that she follow a busy rural highway for several hundred meters. The highway did not have sidewalks or any other pedestrian-friendly amenities, and Rosenberg was struck by a car. Rosenberg filed suit against both the driver of the car that struck her and Google, claiming both carried responsibility in her injury. Her lawyers claim Google is liable because it did not warn her that the route would not offer a safe place for a pedestrian to walk. Google has pointed out that the directions Rosenberg sought come with a warning of caution for pedestrians, but Rosenberg claims that she accessed the Maps function on her Blackberry mobile device, where it did not include the warning."

Comments

Whatever happened to common sense?

[illumnatLA]

Really... jeeze... What ever happened to common sense. If it looks dangerous... it probably is. If her Blackberry told her to insert her arm into an industrial shredder would she have done that as well?

Take a look at this... this is the road in question... There was plenty of room on the left side of the street to walk without being anywhere near the road.

I really hope this gets thrown out of court. People need to take responsibility for their own stupidity.

Re:Whatever happened to common sense?

[Anonymous Coward]

"Take a look at this... this is the road in question... [google.com] There was plenty of room on the left side of the street to walk without being anywhere near the road."

It's much worse than that. There's a walking/cycling trail that parallels most of her route, if the route indicated on the map is correct. Take a look. In many cases it was only a few steps from the road. She could SEE a safe, non-car route paralleling hers, but did not avail herself of it. From the described route, she walked right past the entrance to the trail and stayed on the road. She took the "industrial shredder" option by following the blue line instead. Maybe you could fault Google for not pointing out the trail, but it was RIGHT THERE in plain sight. No, I'll stay on the busy road with no sidewalk.

I'm sure the locals and the municipality are saying "Why the !#%!%$! did we build these stupid trails if people aren't going to use them?"

Re:For serious?

[Spatial]

Warning: Breathe regularly to prevent asphyxiation.

Caution: If you are undergoing fluid immersion, avoid breathing temporarily to avoid drowning.

Re:For serious?

[CronoCloud]

Paris has a disadvantage compared to Chicago...history. Paris was a city when Chicago was a marsh full of wild onions.