Multiple Sufficient Causes

Question 1

A landlord, B tenant. A required by law to put in smoke detectors but doesn’t. C (neighbor) negligently sets fire. B injured by smoke inhalation. Joint and several liability approach

Answer 1

Both A and C on hook for full amount. B choose who to sue and collect full compensation, fair if indivisible injury

Question 2

A landlord, B tenant. A required by law to put in smoke detectors but doesn’t. C (neighbor) negligently sets fire. B injured by smoke inhalation. Several liability approach

Answer 2

Court find A responsible for one portion and B for another

Question 3

What are two approaches to multiple sufficient causes generally

Answer 3

JS liability, Several liability

Question 4

Kingston is about…

Answer 4

Multiple sufficient simultaneous causes

Question 5

Kingston rule

Answer 5

When one or more wrongdoers concurring negligence, each individually responsible for entire damage (multiple acts each alone would have been cause, each is factual harm if other is absent)

Question 6

Kingston reasoning

Answer 6

Factual cause whether competing cause or this cause tortious or innocent BuT if one case natural and one human, human is not liable

Question 7

Two fires set tortiously but one arrives five minutes before the other, what result

Answer 7

Act Cannot be factual cause of an outcome that already occurred, even if cause same harm

Question 8

Fire A of human origin, B natural. Both fires in same direction but A fire destroys property before B arrives. What result

Answer 8

An act can be factual cause in accelerating an outcome that otherwise would have occurred at later time

Question 9

Exception to accelerating cause rule

Answer 9

If one made it worse than the other not in this category

Question 10

Dillon holding

Answer 10

D negligence but for cause of boys death by electrocution even though boy still would’ve died by drowning

Question 11

Dillon damages

Answer 11

Since still would’ve died by drowning, damages for conscious pain and suffering between electrocution and death not death itself

Question 12

Summers holding

Answer 12

If P can prove both D acted negligently, then burden shifts to Ds to prove not cause. If cannot, both are liable

Question 13

Summers situation

Answer 13

Only one D actual cause but don’t know which, no evidence even slightly suggesting one over the other

Question 14

Summers Limits Hypo: D lives in tall thin apartment building. Ordinance requires install safety netting on balconies so things don’t fall on people below. P injured by falling flowerpot.

Answer 14

Not as intuitive, don’t know for sure one of them, could be intentional tort, no one even close to 50% responsible, P might be able to bring additional evidence, can still make summers argument though

Question 15

Sindell is about…

Answer 15

Market share liability

Question 16

Sindell facts

Answer 16

Drug companies promoted, manufactured drug even though FDA approved only on experimental basis. Later ordered to stop.

Question 17

Sindell rule 1

Answer 17

If P can prove each D engaged in tortious conduct of same kind that caused P injury (any one could be cause)

Question 18

Sindell rule 2

Answer 18

No fault of own P can’t prove which one caused, and harm causing products are fungible AND substantially all actors who could have caused harm are named as D then D liable for damages in proportion to market share

Question 19

Sindell is applicable..

Answer 19

Not in every Jdx