Causation Damages, and Defenses

Question 1

The two types of causation that need to be proven for a valid negligence claim

Answer 1

actual (but-for) and proximate

Question 2

Actual (but-for) Causation

Answer 2

Causation where, but for the defendant’s breach, the plaintiff would be uninjured.

Question 3

Evidentiary Requirement for But-For Causation

Answer 3

• In some cases, actual causation requires evidence.
  
  • e.g. plaintiff alleges chemical factory leaked out caused cancer. Plaintiff must prove that the chemical itself causes cancer.

Question 4

When actual causation is not used

Answer 4

Merged causes and unascertainable cause

Question 5

Merged Causes

Answer 5

• Two defendants acting independent of each other releasing destructive force into the environment.
• Destructive forces then combine and hurt the plaintiff.
  
  • e.g. two negligently set fires

Question 6

Liability for Merged Causes

Answer 6

Substantial factor test:

1. Ask whether each breach is substantial in contributing to the injury
2. Even if alone is not enough to cause injury, D can be liable if combined breach with another person causes injury

Question 7

Unascertainable Cause

Answer 7

A situation where the plaintiff can’t ascertain who actually caused the harm

Question 8

Procedure when causation cannot be ascertained

Answer 8

• Burden of proof is shifted to the defendants to prove they are not liable.
• If they can’t meet the burden of proof, they’re jointly liable.

Question 9

How proximate cause is determined

Answer 9

• Foreseeability.
• Any foreseeable consequences of the defendant’s breach is proximately caused.

Question 10

What courts consider when determining proximate causation

Answer 10

1. Things that happen close by
2. Things that happen immediately after
3. Things that have happened before

Question 11

Effect of intervening/supervening causes on proximate causation

Answer 11

• An intervening incident does not break the causal chain.
• A supervening incident does.

Question 12

Intervening Negligent Medical Issues

Answer 12

• It is foreseeable that { car accident victim would also be subject to med mal.
• But, doctor is still also liable.

Question 13

Intervening negligent rescue

Answer 13

• Intervening negligent rescue is foreseeable.
• Original defendant typically must pay for those damages too.

Question 14

Liability for Additional Harm Caused by P to protect themselves from D

Answer 14

• When people cause additional harm to protect themselves from the defendant, the defendant is liable for that additional harm
• e.g. defendant hits your car and you crash into another car. Defendant liable for damage to car you crashed into.

Question 15

Liability for Subsequent Injuries

Answer 15

• If a person sustains another illness/injury because of illness/injury D caused, D is liable for subsequent injury.

Question 16

VA Essay Tip on Causation

Answer 16

Don’t exaggeratethe risk the defendant caused in your exam answers

Question 17

What is the eggshell skull plaintiff rule?

Answer 17

The defendant is liable for injuries he caused even if the plaintiff would not have gotten them if they weren’t especially predisposed to them. Even if damages far exceed what would typically occur.

Question 18

The general affirmative defense to negligence

Answer 18

contributory negligence

Question 19

Comparitive Negligence Rule for the MBE

Answer 19

1. Defendant is allowed to offer evidence that Plaintiff failed to exercise reasonable care for their own safety
   
   • Can do this by showing plaintiff violated self-protective statute, e.g. jaywalking
2. Jury assigns percentage of fault to each part
   
   • Plaintiff’s recovery is reduced by their percentage of fault

Question 20

Virginia Contributory Negligence Rule

Answer 20

Any showing of fault on the plaintiff bars recovery.

Question 21

VA Last Clear Chance Doctrine

Answer 21

• Invoked by a P to counter an accusation of contributory negligence
• P tries to erase consequences of contributory fault.

Question 22

VA Last Clear Chance Doctrine

two categories of defendants

Answer 22

• The helpless plaintiff
• the inattentive plaintiff

Question 23

VA Last Clear Chance Doctrine

Helpless Plaintiff

Answer 23

Someone who negligently placed himself in a position of peril and is physically unable to remove himself from his position.

Question 24

VA Last Clear Chance Doctrine

Helpless Plaintiff Elements

Answer 24

The defendant is liable if:

1. He saw the plaintiff or should have seen the plantiff if he used reasonable care, and
2. There was something the defendant could have reasonably done to avoid it.

Question 25

VA Last Clear Chance Doctrine

Inattentive Plaintiff

Answer 25

Someone who has negligently placed himself in dangerous situation from which he could remove himself, but he is unaware of his peril.

Question 26

VA Last Clear Chance Doctrine

Inattentive Plaintiff Elements

Answer 26

To be liable, the defendant had to have :

1. seen the plaintiff, or
2. realized/should have realized the plaintifff was in peril,
3. in time to avert the situation.