Preview

Does Susie have a case against Ruthless

Good Essays
Open Document
Open Document
584 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
Does Susie have a case against Ruthless
Negligence is a particular type of tort action that involves something the law calls a "duty of care." The standard of care depends on the facts and circumstances of the case but, generally, the duty of care, in its broadest sense, means each of us should behave responsibly and sensibly, in the way a reasonable person would behave.

To be guilty of negligence, a defendant in a lawsuit must breach that duty of care, and the breach of duty must be the cause of harm to the plaintiff.

The law looks at two types of causation—actual cause and proximate cause. Often, injury and harm is the result of a chain of events. The person who is the actual cause may or may not be legally responsible. Proximate cause is that act in the natural, direct, uninterrupted sequence of events without which the injury would not have occurred. Proximate cause seeks to decide who, in that chain of events, is responsible for the harm. This can get complicated.

First case: Henry runs the red light and, as a result, collides with Mary's car which is proceeding lawfully through the intersection, injuring Mary. Henry's negligence is both the actual and proximate cause of Mary's injury.

Second case: Henry is stopped at the red light. Marvin is talking on his cell phone and fails to stop his car, rear-ending Henry, and sending his car into the intersection where it collides with Mary's car, injuring Mary. Henry is the actual, but not the legal cause, of Mary's injury. Marvin's actions are the proximate cause of Mary's injury; his actions are the actual cause, sometimes called the "cause in fact", of the harm.

Susie Marks was seriously injured when the truck in which she was riding failed to negotiate a left turn. On the evening in question, Susie got a ride with Orson to the Elsewhere City Park, where she met her friend, Jerry, and his girlfriend, Kate. Orson said he would pick Susie up at 11:00 p.m. when the park closed. Jerry was a minor who had only been licensed to drive for a few

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Satisfactory Essays

    Pa201 Unit 3 Assignment

    • 1241 Words
    • 5 Pages

    Negligence is defined as “the failure to exercise the standard of care that a reasonably prudent person would have exercised in a similar situation; any conduct that falls below the legal standard established to protect others against unreasonable risk of harm.” Black’s Law Dictionary 1133 (9th ed. 2009) …

    • 1241 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Causation – Causation is the direct link between the act of the defendant and the outcome of the crime. Causation is the finding out of what caused the outcome of the crime.…

    • 1126 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Aarons V. Peterson

    • 425 Words
    • 2 Pages

    ISSUE Is the defendant negligent and liable for injuries to the plaintiff? RULES In negligence, a plaintiff must prove: duty; breach duty; causation; and actual injury. Cite A person owes a heightened duty of care where children may be present.…

    • 425 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Law 421 week 2 work

    • 1527 Words
    • 5 Pages

    Proximate (legal) cause: Was there a legally recognized and close-in-proximity link between the breach of duty and the damages suffered by the injured party?…

    • 1527 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    Nadel Et Al

    • 1394 Words
    • 5 Pages

    4. According to the case, why was this not a case of negligent infliction of…

    • 1394 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    * Superseding Cause – an intervening act that relieves the defendant of liability (Ex: minor motor vehicle accident turns into a fatality due to the doctor making a mistake – other driver not liable for that death)…

    • 5389 Words
    • 22 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    Hsa 515 Law and Health

    • 1411 Words
    • 6 Pages

    The first element that a plaintiff must prove is that the defendant owed him or her legal duty of care. Generally, this duty of care is a legal notion that states that people owe anyone around them or anyone who could be around them a duty to not place them in situations of undue risk of harm. Proving this element will largely depend on the facts of the situation. After the plaintiff has proved that a legal duty of care existed, he or she must then prove that this duty was breached. Generally, courts will use the standard of a ‘reasonable person’ when it comes to this question. Specifically, this means that the judge or jury must view the facts of the situation and decide what a reasonable person would have done in a similar situation. If this reasonable person would have acted differently than the defendant, it’s likely that it will be found that the duty was breached. Causation is the most complicated element of negligence. It means that the plaintiff must prove that the defendant either directly or indirectly caused the injuries and damages suffered by the plaintiff because of the breach of the duty of care. This element has confused even the most respected legal minds over time, and its proof should not be taken lightly. Last, a plaintiff in a negligence case must prove a legally recognized harm, usually in the form of physical injury to a person or to property. It is not enough that the defendant failed to exercise reasonable care. The failure to exercise reasonable care must result in actual damages to a person to whom the defendant owed a duty of care (FindLaw 2012). These damages can be actual costs such as medical expenses and lost income or intangible costs such as pain and suffering or loss of companionship.…

    • 1411 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    One very important issue in this case and many civil lawsuits is negligence. Negligence is when there is a failure to use reasonable care which results in injury or damage to another. It also asks who is responsible for one’s injury. In this case, Mrs. McKoy claims her injuries were caused by T & J’s negligent behavior. In order to prove negligence, T & J must be guilty of five elements: duty of due care, breach, factual cause, proximate cause, and damages.…

    • 605 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Elements Of Negligence

    • 94 Words
    • 1 Page

    Negligence law states that a person or an organization is generally liable when they negligently injure others.…

    • 94 Words
    • 1 Page
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    Torts Study Guide

    • 4740 Words
    • 19 Pages

    Defendant’s actions were the proximate cause (nearest cause/ number of factors that collectively caused the Plaintiff’s injuries) or actual cause (specific factor that caused the Plaintiff’s injuries) of the harm to Plaintiff…

    • 4740 Words
    • 19 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Criminal Law Midterm

    • 601 Words
    • 3 Pages

    A defendant’s actions are the proximate cause of the victim’s death if the result occurs as a consequence of the defendant’s act. There is no other casually connected act. The defendant’s conduct is the direct cause of the harm.…

    • 601 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Torts

    • 18542 Words
    • 1 Page

    Intentional Interference With Person or Property A. Intent 2 types 1. Specific Intent consciously desiring the physical result 2. General Intent knowledge that the result is substantially certainty to follow -The Restatement places torts somewhat on a continuum with Negligence The most culpable form of intent would be a specific intent, or morally apprehensible form of misconduct you swing a baseball bat to hit someone in the face General intent would be next on the continuum knowing with substantial certainty Recklessness- Callous disregard ( I dont give a crap. Gross Negligence- aware of the harm but you are indifferent to it Negligence- foreseeable risk of harm but you fail to exercise reasonable care under the circumstances Most culpable (responsible/punishable)…

    • 18542 Words
    • 1 Page
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Health Care Policy

    • 312 Words
    • 2 Pages

    The four elements necessary to prove a negligence case are duty of care, breach of that duty, injury, and causation. The first requirement in establishing negligence is for a plaintiff to prove the existence of a legal relationship between himself or herself and the defendant. Duty is defined as a legal obligation of care, performance, or observation imposed on one to safeguard the rights of others. This duty, for example, can arise from a relationship between a physician and a patient which may be as simple as a telephone conversation. Duty can also be established by contract or statute between a plaintiff and a defendant.…

    • 312 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    Omission Is Failing To Act

    • 2017 Words
    • 9 Pages

    The defendant won’t be the legal cause if he can show that the victim caused the end result himself. This will only happen if the victim’s reaction was totally unforeseeable. This links to the case R v Williams (1992) because the defendant didn’t think that the victim would jump out the car when the defendant attempted to rob the victim. Another way the chain of causation can be broken is by an act of a third party such as bad medical treatment. However, this is very rare because if the person who was the legal cause didn’t harm the victim, the victim would not have gone to the hospital and the hospital wouldn’t have given the victim poor medical treatment.…

    • 2017 Words
    • 9 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    In order to determine whether or not there is a factual causal connection between the injuries inflicted upon X during the fight and the eventual loss of X’s business, we need to look at the method of the conditio sine qua non theory and determine if there was actually a factual causal nexus. According to Van der Merwe and Olivier, conditio sine qua non theory is when an act is the cause of a result if the act cannot be thought away without the result also disappearing. This means that for an act to be the cause of a result, the result must not exist when the cause is mentally removed. This factual test for causation was accepted in the case of International Shipping Co (Pty) Ltd v Bentley. In the case of X, if the fight between X and Y…

    • 1449 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Good Essays