Chapter 9 - Negligence and Strict Liability

Negligence

creates an unreasonable risk of harm to others

To win a negligent case plaintiff must prove:

1. duty

2. breach of duty

3. causation

4. damages

Duty

standard of care a reasonable person owes another

Breach of duty

failure to live up to the standard of care

causation

a. actual cause - the determination that the plaintiff’s harm was a direct result of the defendants breach of duty

b. proximate cause - the extent to which, the defendant will be held liable for the consequences of his actions

Damages

a compensable loss suffered by the plaintiff

Res Ipsa Loquitur

“the thing speaks for itself” ex: plane crashes, surgical items left in body

1. the event was a kind that ordinarily does not occur w/o negligence

Negligence per se

“negligence in or of itself” cases in which the defendant has violated a stature enacted to prevent a certain type of harm from befalling a specific group to which the plaintiff belongs

Contributory negligence

applies in cases in which the defendant and the plaintiff were both negligent

1. the plaintiffs conduct fell below the standard of care needed to prevent unreasonable risk of harm

2. the plaintiff’s failure was a contributing cause to the plaintiff’s injury

ex: sam and miry in their cars, are facing each other at a stoplight. the light turns green miry turns left and sam travels straight and crashes - miry could recover damages

Comparative negligence

court determines the percentage of fault of the defendant

Assumption of Risk

A defense whereby the defendant must prove that the plaintiff voluntarily assumed the risk that the defendant caused.

Strict-liability

Liability in which responsibility for damages is imposed regardless of the existence of negligence. Also called liability without fault.

1. involves a risk of serious harm to people or property

2. so inherently dangerous that it cannot ever be safely undertaken

3. not usually performed in the immediate community