Please watch this video of a famous road rage incident in New York City.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OVK77U8bgKc

Assume for the purposes of this problem, that the name of the Range Rover owner and operator is Mr. Smith and the name of the injured motorcyclist (who has suffered two broken legs and is paralyzed from the waist down) is Mr. Jones. Jones is the fellow (although difficult to specifically see in the video) who Smith ran over after being surrounded by the motorcyclists.

The answer takes the perspective of a judge trying to sort out liability issues in a civil (NOT CRIMINAL) claim by Mr. Smith versus Mr. Jones, and a claim by Mr. Jones versus Mr. Smith.

Therefore, it is not necessary to comment on the rights or liability of other parties involved in this sequence of events (as you will see, quite a few other individuals were involved), except, of course, insofar as the actions of the others may be relevant to the issues at stake in Smith v. Jones and Jones v. Smith.

Your answer will only deal with issues with respect to intentional torts and not negligence i.e. unintentional torts.

Further, as mentioned above, this is not a criminal law problem. As it turned out, the NYPD did charge many of the individuals involved and the criminal proceedings have been completed. You are to deal with the civil lawsuits by both parties against each other based on intentional torts only.

Also, please remember to use civil law terminology and not to use criminal law terminology in your answer, only civil law terminology.

Please ensure that you, as the judge, discuss all possible legal issues and arguments.