lesson 6 Flashcards
how is a negligent act different from an intentional tort
negligence is an accident with fault, intentional torts occur because of intentional and deliberate acts of a person
palsgraf vs long island railroad (1928)
Ms. Palsgraf was traveling, sitting on a bench waiting for her train. A gentleman dropped his package containing fireworks, and the explosion caused a scale to fly in the air and land on Palsgraf. Her family sued the railroad, went to the supreme court, case discussed and determined that there was no proximate cause.
5 elements must exist to prove negligence
duty of care, breach of duty, factual cause, proximate cause, actual damage
duty of care
the defendant had a legal duty or responsibility to the plaintiff. Often the legal duty is to not do something or to simply act responsibly. (this is usually met)
what can cause you to have different types of duties
status
breach of duty
defendant must breach or violate that duty, often a breach is simply to act irresponsibly or to ignore the duty
factual cause
the defendant’s conduct or actions actually caused the accident
proximate cause
it was foreseeable that conduct like the defendant’s would or could cause injury to the plaintiff
the issue of foreseeability goes back to
reason
actual damage
the plaintiff must have been actually hurt, is not a speculative or de minimus injury
special duties
average individuals have the normal duty to act reasonably under the circumstances, but certain entities and persons have special duties
who has special duties
professionals (doctors, lawyers, architects, accountants), landowners, universities
doctors
cannot claim to have the same duty to cure a sick person as a non-doctor would have
landowners
have different levels of duty to persons injured on their property. it depends on the status of the injured party
trespassing adults
adult trespassers that have no right to be there, that just wander onto the property or have been told not to come there. they have little protection
with trespassing adults, the duty of the landowner is
only for intentional torts or gross misconduct that results in injuries to the trespasser. simple negligence does not breach this high duty.
trespassing children
the exception, the landowner has a higher duty because children are not fully responsible for their actions
cases with trespassing children typically involve
an attractive nuisance - some object that might cause a child to go onto the property
licensee
someone who is on the land for their own purposes with the permission of the landowner
licensee example
landowner has a party, neighbor joins. the owner knows there are rusty nails protruding from a part of the deck. they owe a duty of reasonable care and to give licensee notice of any known dangers.
invitees
owed the highest duty of all, people that are at a public place or people that patronize a business that is open to the public
invitees example
a customer that visits home depot, the store owes them the highest duty of reasonable care. they are also responsible for all the dangers at the location, even ones unknown.
universities
the courts are increasingly requiring higher duties of universities for their students. this is particularly the case when the university has notice that a student may be a risk to other students.
regents of the university of california v superior court of los angeles
student started hearing voices and seeing hallucinations. He made odd statements to professors, thought he was in danger. Faculty tried to encourage him to seek treatment. He brought a knife to class and stabs his female lab partner, she sues because they knew about him.
