Negligence-Causation

Question 1

What are the two types of causation?

Answer 1

Actual and proximate cause.

Question 2

What is the other name for actual cause?

Answer 2

Cause in fact

Question 3

What are the tests for actual cause?

Answer 3

1) But-for test
2) Joint causes-Substantial factor test
3) Alternative causes approach

Question 4

What is the but-for test?

Answer 4

Act or omission is the cause in fact of an injury when the injury would not have occurred but for the act or omission.

Question 5

What test applies when there are several acts, which is each insufficient to cause the injury alone, combine to cause injury?

Answer 5

But-for Test

Question 6

What is the substantial factor test?

Answer 6

Where several causes bring about injury, and any one alone would have been sufficient to cause injury, defendant’s conduct is the cause in fact if it was a substantial factor in causing the injury.

Question 7

When does the substantial factor test apply?

Answer 7

Where several causes bring about the injury, and any one alone would have been sufficient to cause injury.

Question 8

What is the alternative causes approach?

Answer 8

This test applies when there are two acts, only one of which causes injury, but it is not known which one. THe burden of proof shifts to the defendants, and each must show that his negligence is not the actual cause

Question 9

What is the general rule regarding proximate cause?

Answer 9

A defendant is generally liable for all harmful results that are the normal incidents of and within the increased risk caused by acts. This is a foreseeability test.

Question 10

What is the test for proximate cause

Answer 10

Foreseeability

Question 11

In a direct cause case, where there is an uninterrupted chain of events from the negligent act to plaintiff’s injury, what is defendant liable for?

Answer 11

All foreseeable harmful results, regardless of the unusual manner in which they arose or the unusual timing of the cause and effect.

Question 12

Is a defendant liable for the foreseeable results caused by foreseeable intervening forces?

Answer 12

Yes.

Question 13

What are examples of foreseeable intervening forces?

Answer 13

Subsequent medical malpractice, negligence of rescuers, efforts to protect the person or property of oneself or another, injuries caused by another reacting to defendant’s actions, subsequent diseases caused by weakened condition, and subsequent accident substantially caused by the original injury.

Question 14

If there is an independent intervening force that was foreseeable, will defendant be liable?

Answer 14

Yes, if the defendant’s negligence increased the risk of harm from these forces.

Question 15

What are some examples of independent intervening forces that are foreseeable?

Answer 15

Negligent acts of third persons, crimes and intentional torts of third persons, Acts of God.

Question 16

Is a defendant liable for foreseeable results caused by unforeseeable intervening forces?

Answer 16

Usually, if his negligence increased the risk of a foreseeable harmful result and that result is ultimately produced by an unforeseeable intervening force. This rule does not apply where the unforeseeable intervening force was a crime or intentional tort of a third person.

Question 17

Is a defendant liable for unforeseeable results caused by foreseeable intervening forces?

Answer 17

Most courts hold no.

Question 18

Is a defendant liable for unforeseeable results caused by unforeseeable intervening forces?

Answer 18

No, they are superseding causes. Superseding causes break the causal chain.

Question 19

What is the eggshell-plaintiff rul?

Answer 19

Defendant takes his plaintiff as he finds him. The defendant is liable for all damages, including aggravation of an existing condition.