Blow-up. jeanie is hauling several containers of gasoline in her vehicle in preparation for riding her personal watercraft. on the way home, jeanie stops at the automatic teller machine at her bank and exits her car. holly pulls behind her and negligently rear-ends jeanie's car. the car explodes and results in the bank building burning to the ground. the bank sues holly for negligence claiming that holly should have to pay for the entire bank building. the bank claimed that it should be able to recover under the res ipsa loquitur doctrine. which of the following is true regarding whether holly is the proximate cause of the bank burning? a. actual causation would exist because the bank would not have been burnt down if holly had fulfilled her duty to drive properly.
b. holly is not the proximate cause of the bank burning because it was not foreseeable that jeanie would have gas in the back of her pick-up truck that would result in such a fire.
c. the bank is incorrect because the issue here is causation, not whether there was a lack of due care.