Negligence Flashcards

1
Q

Elements

A
  1. Duty
  2. Breach
  3. Cause in Fact
  4. Proximate Cause
  5. Damages
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

Reasonable care standard. How to determine?

A
  1. BPL
  2. “Reasonable person” in those circumstances
  3. Industry standard / custom
  4. Emergency (reasonable given that emergency?)
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

Reasonable Person standard. What are the relevant characteristics of the “reasonable person?”

A

Objective:

  1. Normal intelligence is expected.
    - Insanity not a defense
    - Below normal intelligence not a defense

Subjective:

  1. Additional intelligence, skill, or knowledge of the actor
  2. Physical attributes/handicaps of the actor
    - Intoxication not a defense
  3. Age

EXCEPTION: Child

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

Reasonable Person exception: Child

What are the relevant characteristics of the “reasonable” child?

A
  1. Age
    - Multiples of 7: Below 7 incapable of neg. 7-14 presumed incapable, but could be rebutted. 14+ presumed capable but could be rebutted by D.
  2. Intelligence and experience - mitigating factors for children.

EXCEPTION: Adult activity

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

Negligence per se
(violation of statute)

What is required to constitute breach?

A
  1. Must be a statute (clear)
  2. D must violate statute
  3. Harm suffered must match harm the statute is aimed at preventing
  4. Plaintiff must be in class of persons protected by the statute
  • EXCUSES:
  • Infancy, impossible/unreasonable to comply, safer not to comply)
  • Causal connection necessary
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

Negligence per se
(violation of statute)

Absolute liability as a matter of law OR “just some evidence” of liability?

A

Majority view: Absolute liability
- Martin v. Herzog (failure to turn on lights negligence as matter of law regarding accident)

Minority view: Not conclusive of neg as matter of law

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

Res ipsa loquiter
(the thing speaks for itself)
- No direct evidence of negligence but inference can be made based on indirect evidence.

Elements?

A
  1. Accident must be something that doesn’t normally happen UNLESS negligence
  2. Accident must be the fault of something within the exclusive control/responsibility of the defendant
    - Non-delegable duty
  3. Accident must not be due to any voluntary action on the part of the plaintiff
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly