Roman v. Estate of Gobbo 99 Ohio St.3d 260, 791 N.E.2d 422 (2003) Gobbo had heart surgery. The doctors did not advise Gobbo to stop driving, because he was at risk for a sudden heart attack. Gobbo drove, had a heart attack, died, and his car ran into two other cars, killing and injuring some of the occupants (including Gobbo's wife). Roman sued Gobbo's Estate for negligence. At Trial, the jury was instructed on the sudden-medical-emergency defense. The sudden-medical-emergency defense would be an excuse for negligence if Gobbo's Estate could prove that Gobbo's heart attack was not reasonably foreseeable. See Lehman v. Haynam (133 N.E. 2d 97 (1956)). The Trial Court found for Gobbo's Estate. Roman appealed. Even though Gobbo was at fault, the jury found that the heart attack was not foreseeable. This is a question of fact that the Appellate Court can't overrule. The Appellate Court affirmed. The Appellate Court found that in order to be found negligent, a defendant must have acted unreasonably. When there is no unreasonable conduct, there is no fault. To find a defendant liable for the effects of unforeseen medical emergencies would be to impose strict liability, which is inappropriate. Roman unsuccessfully argued that drivers who operate a vehicle with knowledge of medical condition should bear the risk of injuries caused by that condition. Of course, then anyone with an inkling of a possible medical condition would be precluded from using the sudden-medical-emergency defense. Note that this rule doesn't work the other way around for contributory negligence. A blind person can't be held contributorily negligent for not seeing an obvious hole in the ground and falling in. See Shepard v. Gardner Wholesale, Inc. (256 So.2d 877 (1972)).