Study Notes on Negligence and Strict Liability
Negligence and Strict Liability
Overview
Mistakes are a part of life; the key issue is the response to these errors.
Quote by Nikki Giovanni: "Mistakes are a fact of life. It is the response to error that counts."
Elements of a Negligence Claim
To establish a claim for negligence, a plaintiff must demonstrate the following elements:
Duty of Care: The defendant owed a duty of care to the plaintiff.
Breach of Duty: The defendant committed a breach of that duty.
Causation: The breach was both the actual and proximate cause of the injury sustained by the plaintiff.
Duty Owed
A defendant owes a duty of reasonable care if the plaintiff could foreseeably be at risk of harm due to the defendant's actions.
A special relationship may create this duty, such as:
Doctor-Patient: The physician must act with reasonable care to ensure patient safety.
Lawyer-Client: Legal professionals must exercise adequate care in handling client matters.
Accountant-Client: Accountants are expected to maintain due diligence in financial matters.
Breach of Duty
If a duty exists, determining whether the defendant breached that duty involves the Reasonable Person Standard:
This requires evaluating whether a reasonable person under similar circumstances would have acted differently.
The focus is on the behavior of the defendant rather than their intent.
Recklessness may signify an unreasonable action.
Special Doctrines
Significant concepts related to negligence include:
Premises Liability: A property owner's duty varies based on the visitor's status on the property.
Negligence Per Se: Violation of a statute can be used to establish negligence.
Premises Liability Cases
Duty of care differs based on the type of person on the property:
Invitee: Typically a business visitor or public member; the owner must provide reasonable safety measures.
Licensee: Someone on the property for their own purposes; the owner must warn of hidden dangers.
Trespasser: Individuals on the property illegally; the owner is not liable for injury unless willful harm is inflicted.
Negligence Per Se
If a defendant violates a law intended to protect a specific class of individuals, it may constitute a breach of duty if:
The plaintiff was within the intended protected class.
The harm suffered was the type the statute was designed to prevent.
Causation and Injury
Types of injuries include:
Bodily injuries, emotional distress, property damages, and economic loss.
Plaintiffs may claim compensatory damages for tangible (personal and property) and intangible (emotional) injuries.
Causation Requirements
To link misconduct to injury, two components of causation must be established:
Actual Cause: The plaintiff would not have been injured but for the defendant's breach of duty.
Proximate Cause: The injury must be a foreseeable consequence of the defendant’s actions.
Intervening Cause
An intervening cause refers to a subsequent act, force, or event that may aggravate the plaintiff’s injury.
Example: An accident occurs, and while the plaintiff is unconscious, a thief steals their wallet.
If the theft was foreseeable, the defendant remains liable; if not foreseeable, the defendant may not be held liable.
Res Ipsa Loquitur
This doctrine applies when:
The defendant had control over the object causing harm.
The harm would not usually occur without negligence.
The plaintiff was not responsible for their injury.
Example: A patient undergoes abdominal surgery and later suffers pain due to a surgical clamp left inside.
Defenses Against Negligence
Contributory Negligence: The plaintiff’s own lack of reasonable care can render them partially or entirely responsible for their injury.
Example: In a car accident context, if the plaintiff is found to be talking on a cell phone while driving, this may imply contributory negligence.
Historically, contributory negligence could serve as a complete defense until comparative negligence systems were adopted, allowing relative negligence to determine damage awards.
Comparative Negligence
In the comparative negligence system, both parties’ negligence is evaluated, and damages are awarded proportionately.
Assumption of Risk
Defined as the plaintiff's voluntary consent to face known dangers.
Example: A snowboarder who breaks their leg during a fall may have assumed the risk inherent in the activity.
An exculpatory clause in a contract may also indicate that the plaintiff has waived their right to claim injury by assuming the risk of injury explicitly.
Strict Liability
Definition: Liability without fault; a defendant is held liable regardless of intent or recklessness.
Typically applied in cases of product liability and abnormally dangerous activities.
The rationale behind strict liability is a policy decision that the risks associated with certain activities should be absorbed by those who undertake them rather than innocent victims.
True or False Statements
A duty of due care can arise only if a contract or statute establishes it.
Without a duty, a breach cannot exist.
Res ipsa loquitur refers to the notion that "the thing speaks for itself" and is related to causation.
Negligence per se occurs when a plaintiff contributes to their own injury.
Multiple Choice Questions
Elements of a negligence claim include: duty of due care, breach of duty, actual and proximate cause, injury to the plaintiff. Answer: All of the above.
The reasonable person test assesses: Defendant’s behavior rather than intent. Answer: Defendant's behavior.
The causation element requires proof of both actual cause (the “but for” test) and proximate cause. Answer: Both (a) and (b).
A property owner must exercise reasonable care for the safety of their: Invitees, Licensees, Trespassers. Answer: Invitees.
Thought Question
Consider the social purpose of tort law and the effectiveness of its remedies in promoting justice.
Negligence and Strict Liability
Overview
Everyone makes mistakes. What matters is how we handle those mistakes and who is responsible for the damage caused.
Nikki Giovanni Quote: "Mistakes are a fact of life. It is the response to error that counts."
The 4 Parts of a Negligence Claim
To win a lawsuit for negligence, a person (the plaintiff) must prove four things:
Duty of Care: The other person (the defendant) had a responsibility to be careful.
Breach of Duty: The defendant failed to be careful.
Causation: The failure to be careful actually caused the injury.
Injury: The plaintiff was actually hurt or lost money.
Duty of Care
You have a "duty" to be careful if your actions could easily hurt someone else.
Some people have a special duty because of their jobs:
Doctors and Patients: Doctors must take good care of their patients.
Lawyers and Clients: Lawyers must do their job correctly for their clients.
Accountants and Clients: Accountants must be very careful with money records.
Breach of Duty (The "Reasonable Person" Test)
To figure out if someone was careless, the law asks: "Would a normal, sensible person have done the same thing in that situation?"
It doesn't matter if the person meant to be nice; what matters is if their behavior was safe.
Recklessness: Acting very dangerously also counts as a breach.
Property Owner Rules (Premises Liability)
How careful a property owner must be depends on who is visiting:
Invitee (Customers/Public): The owner must make the place safe for them.
Licensee (Social Guests): The owner must warn them about hidden dangers (like a loose floorboard).
Trespasser (Uninvited): The owner isn't usually responsible for their injuries unless the owner tried to hurt them on purpose.
Negligence Per Se
This happens when someone breaks a law that was made to keep people safe.
If a driver runs a red light and hits a pedestrian, they are "negligent per se" because they broke a safety law.
Causation (What caused the injury?)
There are two types of causes needed:
Actual Cause: The "But For" test. But for the defendant's mistake, the injury wouldn't have happened.
Proximate Cause: The injury must be a predictable result of the mistake. If something totally random and crazy happens, it might not count.
Res Ipsa Loquitur (The thing speaks for itself)
This is used when it's obvious someone was negligent, even if you can't prove exactly what happened.
Example: If a surgeon leaves a tool inside a patient’s body during surgery, it’s obvious someone was careless.
Defenses (Ways to win the case)
Contributory Negligence: If the injured person was even a little bit at fault, they might get no money at all.
Comparative Negligence: The court decides what percentage of the accident was each person's fault. For example, if the plaintiff was $20\%$ responsible, they get $20\%$ less money.
Assumption of Risk: If you knew something was dangerous and did it anyway (like bungee jumping), you might not be able to sue if you get hurt.
Strict Liability
Definition: Being held responsible even if you weren't trying to be mean or careless.
This usually applies to: