Chapter Five Flashcards
What is the essence of the question regarding reasonable care, and why is the determination of reasonableness sometimes problematic?
The question of reasonable care boils down to what a reasonable person would have done under similar circumstances. The standard of conduct that the community demands must be an external and objective one, rather than the individual judgment, good or bad, of the particular actor; and it must be, so far as possible, the same for all persons, since the law can have no favorites. At the same time, it must make proper allowance for the risk apparent to the actor, for the actor’s capacity to meet it, and for the circumstances under which he or she must act.
What is the Learned Hand formula, and how does it help in assessing reasonableness?
He reduced these considerations into a formula and concluded that a defendant breached his duty if P × L > B.
Why is an objective standard used to evaluate the reasonableness of a defendant’s conduct?
To reduce the uncertainty in our legal system and to maximize safety to members of society, the peculiar frailties and idiosyncrasies of defendants generally are not taken into consideration in assessing the reasonableness of their conduct. With few exceptions, then, in tort law we use an objective standard
What is a reasonable person expected to know?
Reasonable persons are expected to know the “qualities and habits of human beings and animals and the qualities, characteristics, and capacities of things and forces in so far as they are matters of common knowledge at the time and in the community” as well as “common law, legislative enactments, and general customs in so far as they are likely to affect the conduct of the other or third persons”
Which of the following characteristics of a defendant are taken into consideration when assessing reasonableness?
Mental state:No Intelligence:No Emotional state:No Intoxication:No Physical challenges, such as blindness—Yes
To what standard of care are children held?
Children are held to the standard of a “reasonable person of like age, intelligence, and experience under like circumstances”
To what standard of care are people held in emergency situations?
In an emergency people are not expected to act with the same rational and calm consideration that one would expect in a less stressful situation. But even in an emergency a defendant is expected to act reasonably,
How does custom affect the evaluation of reasonableness?
Courts will look at the standard practices of a trade or community in assessing the reasonableness of the defendant’s conduct.
To what standard of care are professionals held?
A defendant who possesses a higher degree of knowledge or skill as a result of training or experience will be held to a higher standard of care.
What is negligence per se and how does it assist a plaintiff in proving negligence?
This doctrine, as applied by the majority of the courts, requires that (1) the violated statute be applicable to the facts of the case, and (2) a causal link between the act constituting a violation of the statute and the plaintiff’s injury be established. A statutory violation is considered merely evidence of negligence and may be outweighed by other evidence of due care.
What must a plaintiff show to prove negligence per se?
To prove negligence per se the plaintiff must first show that he or she is a member of the class of persons whom the statute was intended to protect. The plaintiff must also show that the statute was designed to protect against the kind of harm that was sustained.
What are automobile-guest statutes and why were they introduced?
require that the driver’s misconduct be willful and wanton, grossly negligent, or reckless before he or she will be held liable. Enacted so drivers who were successfully sued by their guests had to bear the cost themselves.
What is the status of automobile-guest statutes today?
Beginning in the 1970s a number of automobile-guest statutes were either repealed or found unconstitutional. Today only a few states still have such statutes in effect.
What is the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur and how does it help plaintiffs?
A court-developed doctrine that makes the plaintiff’s task easier is the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur, which means, literally, “the thing speaks for itself.” This doctrine allows the plaintiff to create an implication that the defendant was negligent without providing direct evidence of that negligence.
What must a plaintiff prove before being able to rely on the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur?
(1) The instrument that caused the plaintiff’s injury was under the exclusive control of the defendant or, stated another way, the negligence was probably due to the defendant.
(2) The injury suffered by the plaintiff was of a type that does not ordinarily occur except as a result of someone’s negligence.
(3) The plaintiff did not voluntarily contribute to his or her own injuries.
(4) Some courts also require that the plaintiff show that the defendant is better able to explain the events that transpired than the plaintiff.
