Ronald rawls and zabian bailey were in an auto accident in bridgeport, connecticut. bailey rear-ended rawls at a stoplight. the evidence showed that bailey had failed to apply his brakes in time to avoid the collision, failed to turn his vehicle to avoid the collision, failed to keep his vehicle under control, and was inattentive to his surroundings. because bailey’s auto insurance did not cover all of the costs, rawls filed a suit in a connecticut state court against his own insurance company, progressive northern insurance co. rawls wanted to obtain benefits under an underinsured motorist clause. rawls claimed that bailey had been negligent. could rawls collect from progressive because of bailey’s negligence?

I think he can not . I believe that it has nothing to do that if for example  Bailey had a car insurance with Progressive, which means it is  supposed to provide additional insurance  when they are injured by someone who does not have adequate insurance to cover the full  damages. Bailey was negligent In the car accident. Bailey had failed to apply his brakes in time to avoid the collision, failed to turn his vehicle to avoid the collision, failed to keep his vehicle under control, and was inattentive to his surroundings.

Explanation:

the numbers are even higher.

explanation:

statistics have shown that more that 60% of test takers fail the first time and have to retake the test.

all i have to say is that people are truly ignorant and don't have anything better to do with their lives.