Negligence: Causation Flashcards
1
Q
What is cause-in-fact (or actual cause)?
A
- P shows that, it is more likely than not, that but for D’s negligence, P would not have been injured. Other reasons don’t matter.
o EXAMPLE: City of Rochester mixed a potable water line with a sewage line. The line that has the drinking water is called the Hemlock line and the sewage line is called the Holly line. Stanley contracts typhoid from drinking tainted water. City claims there are 20 different ways to get typhoid. If Stanley can show that it is more likely than not that City was responsible, he has established cause in fact. If the jury says there is a 75% chance City is liable, Stanley will still get all of his damages.
2
Q
What is the causation test when there are multiple causes for P’s injury?
A
- The substantial factor test: Used when 2 Ds cause harm, but each D alone would have been enough to cause the entire harm. In this case, each D is a cause-in-fact if each was a substantial factor in causing the harm.
o EXAMPLE: Abel negligently sets a fire. Alone, Abel’s fire would burn down Parker’s mansion worth $1M. Burnie also sets a fire that would, by itself, burn down the mansion. The fires combine and destroys the mansion. If Parker sues Abel, he cannot show but for Abel’s fire, his house would not have been destroyed because Burnie’s fire would have done the same. Parker must use the substantial factor test to prove actual cause.
3
Q
How is liability spread among multiple defendants who cause the same tort?
A
- Assume joint and several liability, so that P can sue one or both Ds and collect entire amount from one D alone. The D found liable can seek contribution from the other D.
4
Q
When is joint and several liability available?
A
- Joint and several liability is available in situations where two or more defendants acting in concert injure the plaintiff or where two or more defendants acting independently injure the plaintiff, and the resulting damages cannot be allocated to particular defendants, all of the defendants are liable for the entirety of the plaintiff’s injury.
- The plaintiff can execute against each defendant for the total damages suffered, although the plaintiff may only recover from any or all defendants an amount equal to the total damages awarded.
5
Q
What kind of causation must P prove in loss of chance cases?
A
- Loss of chance cases typically arise in medical malpractice situations. P must show that but for the medical malpractice, P would not have lost chance/died.
o EXAMPLE: Paulina goes to see a Doctor who commits malpractice and fails to diagnose her cancer. If Doctor had made a timely diagnosis, there would have been a 40% chance that Paulina could survive, but by the time it is discovered, it is incurable. Paulina sues Doctor. She will lose because she cannot show that it is more likely than not that but for Doctor’s malpractice she would have survived. She already had a 60% chance of death. - Many jurisdictions now recharacterize injury in these cases as the loss of a chance and reduce damages, but do not extinguish them.
6
Q
From what case did alternative liability theory emerge?
A
- Summers v. Tice – two hunters shoot at quail and P, who is clearly in the line of fire, gets hit. However, it is not clear which hunter actually fired the shot that hurt P!
7
Q
When does alternative liability theory apply?
A
- All Ds are tortious/negligent;
- All Ds are being sued together (can’t use if one D is left out); and
- Small number of Ds.
8
Q
How is liability shown in cases like Summers v. Tice, where it is not clear which tortfeasor actually caused the injury?
A
- Burden shifts to Ds to show that they were not the cause. If Ds cannot do so, they will be jointly/severally liable.
9
Q
In which examples does market share liability apply?
A
- P cannot show which of a large group of negligent Ds was responsible for manufacturing the product that caused her harm. P can sue those who might have caused her harm and each D is responsible based on its share of the market.
- Several liability - X had 10% of the relative market; X will pay 10% of P’s damages unless X can show it could not have made the product that harmed P.
10
Q
Why is there a distinction between actual causation and proximate causation?
A
- Proximate (legal) causation asks whether there are any policy reasons to cut off liability from the defendant, even though they may have been the actual cause of the P’s injury
11
Q
What do we ask to determine whether D’s actions were the proximate cause of P’s harm?
A
- Was that TYPE of injury suffered by P within the risk created by D’s negligent conduct?
o EXAMPLE: Dan negligently leaves a jar of rat poison next to the stove with all the other spices. Paulette is using the stove and the heat from the stove interacts with the rat poison in a way that the jar heats up and becomes a missile. The jar smashes into a chandelier, breaking it, and causing $20,000 worth of damage. Dan’s lawyer could argue that even though Dan owed a duty to Paulette, that he breached by acting unreasonably, this is not a foreseeable type of injury. The foreseeable injury would be ingesting the rat poison
12
Q
Under proximate causation, would D be liable for the full extent of P’s harm, even though D could not foresee the extent of that harm?
A
- Yes. It does not matter that P suffered more harm than one would foresee. D is responsible for full the EXTENT of harm, as long as the TYPE of harm is foreseeable.
13
Q
What is the eggshell skull rule?
A
- Take your victims as you find them. It does not matter if P is susceptible to greater harm because of a unique susceptibility, like an eggshell skull. D is still liable for the extent of the harm caused if that type of harm was foreseeable.
14
Q
What is a superseding cause?
A
- Unforeseeable, intervening cause that breaks the chain of causation between the initial wrongful act and the ultimate injury.
15
Q
How would a superseding cause affect the proximate causation analysis?
A
- A superseding cause relieves the original tortfeasor of liability for lack of proximate cause.
