Causation

Question 1

“But For” Test

Answer 1

More likely than not, but for Defendant’s (specific conduct), Plaintiff’s (specific harm) would not have happened.

Question 2

Substantial Factor Test

Answer 2

More likely than not, Defendant’s (specific conduct) was a substantial factor in the Plaintiff’s (specific harm).

Question 3

Cause-In-Fact: Multiple Defendants

Answer 3

Did their actions combined cause it but it otherwise wouldn’t have happened? Use “but for” test.

Would each of these actions alone have caused it? Use the substantial factor test.

*if there is only one defendant, they are almost always the “but for” cause

Question 4

Theories of Liability

Answer 4

Joint and several liability
Alternative liability
Market share liability

Question 5

Joint and Several Liability

Answer 5

All defendants contributed to or caused the harm and the plaintiff’s injury is indivisible. Each is liable for the entire amount of damages, and the plaintiff can pick the amount to recover from each.

Question 6

Alternative Liability

Answer 6

Only one defendant caused the harm, but the plaintiff cannot prove which one it was. Each is liable for the entire amount of damages, and the plaintiff can pick the amount to recover from each.

Question 7

Market Share Liability

Answer 7

All defendants had control of the market and any one of them could have caused the injury, but all were negligent.

They are individually liable and will each pay an amount of damages proportionate to their market share.

Question 8

Proximate Cause - Categories

Answer 8

Type of harm
Manner of harm
Extent of harm

Question 9

PxC: Type of Harm

Answer 9

Was the exact type of harm to the plaintiff within the foreseeable consequences of the defendant’s actions?

Question 10

PxC: Manner of Harm

Answer 10

Time
Space
Intervening/Superseding force

Question 11

Intervening v. Superseding Force

Answer 11

Only a superseding force will remove liability from the original negligent defendant

Superseding: the intervening force was so freakish and bizarre as to completely sever liability

Question 12

Factors to shift liability to a superseding force

Answer 12

1. The culpability of the intervenor – intentional, criminal, reckless, negligent, or innocent
2. The competence and reliability of the person upon whom the reliance is placed
3. The intervenor’s understanding of the facts and situation
4. The seriousness of the danger
5. The number of persons likely to be at risk of danger
6. The length of time elapsed between the conduct of the parties
7. The likelihood that proper care will or will not be used AND
8. The ease with which each of the parties can take precautions

Question 13

Intervening/Superseding: medical complications rule

Answer 13

The law regards the negligence of the original wrongdoer as the proximate cause of the damages flowing from the subsequent negligent or unskillful treatment

(including shit like ambulances crashing)