Stevens v. Veenstra
Michigan Court of Appeals
573 N.W.2d 341 (1998)

- Written by Sean Carroll, JD
Facts
Aaron Veenstra (defendant), a 14-year-old, took a driver’s education class. While practicing driving with the driving instructor, Veenstra ran into James Stevens (plaintiff), causing injury. Stevens brought a negligence suit against Veenstra. The trial court instructed the jury to hold Veenstra to the standard of care for a reasonably careful minor of the same age, intelligence, and experience as Veenstra. The jury found in Veenstra’s favor. Stevens appealed, arguing that the trial court’s jury instructions were improper because a minor engaging in a dangerous adult activity, such as driving, should be charged with the adult standard of care. Veenstra argued that because he was driving during a driver’s education course, a minor-specific program, he should not be charged with the standard of care for an adult activity.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Murphy, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 814,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.