This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

Sibert (D) was in line in his car at a drive-in bank window. Wilson (P) was in a car just behind D by four or five feet. D then noticed the car in front of him starting to back up, and D shifted his car into reverse in reaction and backed up into P's car. P sued for damages. During trial, D testified that his maneuver was motivated by sheer reaction and reflex and admitted that he did not know if a car was behind him. The case was submitted to the jury under instructions regarding negligence and the sudden emergency doctrine. D got the verdict and P appealed.

The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.

Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.