Causation - Factual Cause

Question 1

“but for” test

Answer 1

1) default test used
2) applies to most single-defendant cases
3) also applies to “concurrent cases”, where several, concurrent negligent acts combine to cause the injury, but none of the acts alone would have been sufficient to cause it (ie, two negligently driven cars collide, injuring a plaintiff)

Question 2

“substantial factor” test

Answer 2

1) also called “joint causes” test, because it applies to joint cause cases
2) two or more causes combine - and either, alone, would have still caused same injury (ie two defendants negligently cause fires on their land…the fires spread and combine, then spread and burn down plaintiff’s house….facts show that either fire alone would have spread the same way and still burned down plaintiff’s house, even without the other fire - this is an example of a joint causes case

Question 3

“joint causes” test

Answer 3

same thing as substantial factor test - just another name for it (because it is applied to joint cause cases)

Question 4

“alternative causes approach” test

Answer 4

multiple defendants, any one of which must have caused the injury - but plaintiff is unable to prove which one’s act caused the injury (ie, three friends go hunting

Question 5

firefighter’s rule

Answer 5

A public safety officer (ie, policeman or fireman) cannot recover for injuries suffered while in the line of duty.

This is based on assumption of risk, for public policy reasons.