Negligence Privileges

Question 1

Excuses for negligence per se:

Answer 1

1. The violation is reasonable because of the actor’s incapacity
2. He neither knows nor should know of the occasion for compliance
3. The person is unable after reasonable diligence or care to comply
4. He is confronted by an emergency not due to his own misconduct
5. Compliance would involve a greater risk of harm to the actor or to others.

Question 2

Constructive Notice

Answer 2

Constructive notice assumes that if the defendant was taking reasonable care, they would have had actual notice of a hazard, so they are treated as having actual notice

Question 3

Reasonably Foreseeable

Answer 3

Did the defendant owe a duty to the plaintiff? What were they obligated to do so?

Question 4

Attractive Nuisance

Answer 4

An owner of a property may be liable for injuries to children who trespass to land or chattel if the injury results from a hazardous object or condition on the land that is likely to attract children who are unable to appreciate the risk posed by the object or condition

This doctrine only applies to children!!

Question 5

Disability

Answer 5

Those who have a disability would have the same standard of care that a reasonably prudent person would have had he had such disability.

Question 6

Alcohol

Answer 6

Courts have consistently refused to make any allowance to voluntary intoxication since its voluntary

Question 7

Mental Illness

Answer 7

You cannot be held liable if you have a sudden mental incapacity

Question 8

Driving and Negligence

Answer 8

• A driver must be aware of flaws and faults that would be noticed under a reasonable inspection.
• A person who is being evaluated is deemed to have the knowledge that an ordinary prudent person would have.

Question 9

Professional Standard of Care

Answer 9

One who engages in a business, occupation, calling or profession must exercise the requisite degree of learning, skill, and ability of that calling with reasonable and ordinary care
-A professional is held to the OBJECTIVE minimum standard of care, applicable to all of that profession
-Evidence of customary practice and usage may be used as evidence of what a reasonable person would do in the same circumstances

Question 10

Emergencies

Answer 10

A person in an emergency is not expected to exercise the same standard of care as someone who is not in an emergency

Question 11

Adult vs. Child standard of care

Answer 11

1. An activity characteristically undertaken by adults (driving a car)
2. Activity is dangerous

Question 12

Foreseeability Factors

Answer 12

1. When a reasonable person would take action to avoid harm
2. If a reasonable person would anticipate risk, then defendant liable
3. Defendant liable for consequences that are foreseeable a the time of negligent conduct
4. What risk is created and how much burden to eliminate
5. How easy to avoid risk

Question 13

Superseding Causes and Crime

Answer 13

Must not be foreseeable, i.e. must be extraordinary
ex: If the defendant’s negligence created foreseeability risk that a third person would commit a crime or intentional tort, the defendant’s liability will not be cuff off by this intentional act Rescue Doctrine

Question 14

Rescue Doctrine

Answer 14

Under the rescue doctrine, tortfeasors can be held liable for injuries that occur to rescuers of the victims of the initial tortious act

Question 15

Service of Liquor

Answer 15

Majority rule: Many jurisdictions instead, impose liability on those who serve alcohol to minors

Minority rule: a host who serves liquor to an adult social guest, is liable for injuries inflicted on a third party when that negligence is caused by the intoxicated