Negligence

Question 1

5 components of the prima facie case for negligence

Answer 1

Duty, Breach, Cause in Fact, Proximate Cause, Actual Damage

Question 2

The defendant in a negligence case owes a general Duty of Care to

Answer 2

all foreseeable victims of his/her carelessness

Question 3

The defendant in a negligence case does not owe a duty to

Answer 3

unforeseeable victims who are outside the zone of danger. size of the zone of danger varies depending on the circumstances.

Question 4

Limits on Liability

Answer 4

Policy, Privatism, and Common Sense

Question 5

Restatement 3rd Approach to Liability

Answer 5

duty is automatic when ∆ action causes personal injury; foreseeability is not relevant

Question 6

Under restatement 3rd Courts can create non-duty rules for…

Answer 6

specific policy reasons (vague, open)

Question 7

Proximate Cause in Rest. 3 is

Answer 7

harm within the risk (no distinction between remote contingencies or intervening acts)

Question 8

Who decides harm within the risk under Rest.3

Answer 8

Jury

Question 9

Cases that seem to suggest the relevance of duty

Answer 9

Video game case, gun case , horror movie example

(Even though it’s highly foreseeable, we don’t want to create a responsibility on the πto protect crazy ∆)

Question 10

Generally, a defendant owes as much care as a

Answer 10

reasonably prudent person would enact under reasonable circumstances.

Question 11

If a defendant has superior skill (body of information),

Answer 11

owes as much care as a reasonably prudent person who has the same superior skill would enact under similar circumstances.

Question 12

The reasonably prudent person standard will incorporate these defendant physical characteristics only if they are relevant.

Answer 12

blind, deaf, height etc.

Question 13

Six “Special Duty” Situations

Answer 13

Children; Professionals; Possessors of Land; Negligence Per Se; Affirmative Acts; Negligent Infliction of Emotional Distress.

Question 14

Age where you owe no duty of care and cannot be held liable for negligence.

Answer 14

Children under the age of 5

Question 15

A Professional owes the same duty of care as

Answer 15

an average member of the same profession

Question 16

A land owner owes a duty to _______ trespassers

Answer 16

known, or anticipated

Question 17

land owner duty

Answer 17

to protect from hazards on his/her land that are (1) artificial (man-made); (2) highly dangerous and capable of inflicting serious harm; (3) that are hidden from the trespasser; and (4) that are known to the owner.

Question 18

A Licensee is

Answer 18

someone who enters someone else’s land with permission but not for business purposes (i.e. social guests).

Question 19

A landowner has a duty to protect a licensee

Answer 19

licensee from (1) concealed danger that (2) the land owner has advanced knowledge of

Question 20

An Invitee

Answer 20

someone who enters land with permission and confers an economic benefit to the possessor of that land (e.g. someone who enters places open to the public)

Question 21

A landowner has a duty to protect invitees against

Answer 21

(1) concealed hazards (2) that they knew about or could have discovered through reasonable inspection.

Question 22

Rowland v Christian

Answer 22

Case that got rid of the traditional categories & created a general duty of reasonable care for landowners

Question 23

Courts or juries can consider status factors as

Answer 23

relevant to ascertaining negligence (i.e burglary is not highly foreseeable)

Question 24

Firefighters and police officers ______ recover for injures that are inherent risks of their jobs.

Answer 24

never

Question 25

Infant or child trespassers are entitled to

Answer 25

reasonably prudent care regarding artificial conditions that create an attractive hazard

Question 26

Whenever a landowner owns a duty, they can satisfy that duty by either

Answer 26

(1) fixing the problem or (2) by giving an adequate warning.

Question 27

Negligence Per Se

Answer 27

violation of a statue

Question 28

Negligence Per Se gets rid of the duty and breach elements, if the plaintiff can show

Answer 28

that the statute: (1) seeks to protect a class of persons to which the plaintiff belongs and (2) seeks to prevent a risk of the same type as occurred in this case

Question 29

Negligence per se does not apply if

Answer 29

∆ compliance with the statute would be more dangerous than the violation or if statutory compliance was impossible under the circumstances (reasonably prudent person standard applies)

Question 30

There is no affirmative duty to act unless

Answer 30

1) the defendant and the party in peril had a pre-existing relationship (that is formal or legal in nature) or (2) if the defendant’s actions caused the peril. [In this situation, the duty that is owed is what is reasonable under the circumstances.]

Question 31

If a defendant takes on a duty where none exits, they are liable if

Answer 31

if s/he acts unreasonably and causes harm

Question 32

A defendant is liable for Negligent Infliction of Emotional Distress in a Near-Miss Case if π can show that

Answer 32

(1) ∆’s negligent conduct put π in a zone of physical danger and (2) the plaintiff suffered subsequent physical manifestation of the resulting emotional distress.

Question 33

Totality of the Circumstances Test

Answer 33

One of the foreseeability tests. (See also Balancing, Prior Similar Incidents)