🤕Torts Unit 9 – Negligence – Special Duties and Limitations
Negligence law explores when people can be held responsible for harming others through carelessness. It requires proving duty, breach, causation, and damages. Special duties arise in certain relationships, like common carriers and professionals, while exceptions limit liability in some situations.
Causation and damages can get tricky, with multiple causes and complex calculations for future losses. Defenses like comparative negligence and assumption of risk can reduce or eliminate liability. Real-world examples span slip-and-falls to medical malpractice, showing negligence's broad application.
Negligence occurs when a person fails to exercise reasonable care, resulting in harm or injury to another
Four key elements must be proven: duty, breach, causation, and damages
Duty of care exists when the law recognizes a relationship between the defendant and plaintiff requiring the defendant to act with a certain standard of care
Breach of duty happens when the defendant's conduct falls below the standard of care a reasonable person would observe in the same situation
Causation requires showing the defendant's negligence was the actual and proximate cause of the plaintiff's injury or harm
Damages refer to the losses suffered by the plaintiff due to the defendant's negligent conduct, which can include medical expenses, lost wages, pain and suffering
Special Duties: Who Owes What?
Certain relationships or circumstances create a heightened duty of care beyond the standard reasonable person
Common carriers (buses, trains, airlines) owe the highest duty of care to ensure passenger safety
Must use utmost care and diligence to avoid even the slightest negligence
Innkeepers have a special duty to protect guests from foreseeable harm on the premises
Landowners owe varying duties depending on the visitor's status (invitee, licensee, trespasser)
Invitees are owed the highest duty, including warning of known dangers and maintaining safe conditions
Professionals (doctors, lawyers, accountants) must adhere to the standard of care of their profession
Parents have a duty to supervise and control their minor children to prevent foreseeable harm to others
Duty of Care: The Exceptions
No general duty to rescue or assist others in peril, unless a special relationship exists (parent-child, common carrier-passenger)
No duty to control the conduct of third parties, barring a special relationship (employer-employee) or if the defendant's own conduct creates the risk
The "fireman's rule" bars firefighters and police officers from suing for injuries sustained in the course of their duties
Based on assumption of risk and public policy considerations
Statutory exceptions may impose specific duties, such as "Good Samaritan" laws protecting those who provide emergency aid
The "economic loss rule" generally precludes recovery for purely economic harm without accompanying physical damage or injury
Courts may find no duty exists due to public policy concerns, such as preventing unlimited or disproportionate liability
Causation: Tricky Scenarios
"But-for" causation: the injury would not have occurred but for the defendant's negligence
Necessary condition, but may not be sufficient alone
Proximate cause: the defendant's negligence must be closely enough related to the injury to justify imposing liability
Foreseeability is a key factor in determining proximate cause
Intervening causes may break the causal chain if they are unforeseeable or extraordinary
Superseding causes are intervening forces that completely replace the defendant's negligence as the proximate cause
Multiple sufficient causes: when two or more independent negligent acts could each have caused the injury alone (two fires merging)
Courts may apply the "substantial factor" test or find joint and several liability
Lost chance doctrine: allows recovery for the loss of a chance at survival or better outcome, even if the original odds were less than 50%
Res ipsa loquitur ("the thing speaks for itself") allows an inference of negligence without direct proof when the accident is of a type that normally occurs only due to negligence and the defendant had exclusive control
Damages: When Things Get Complicated
Compensatory damages aim to restore the plaintiff to their pre-injury position
Economic damages include medical expenses, lost wages, and property damage
Non-economic damages encompass pain and suffering, emotional distress, and loss of enjoyment of life
Punitive damages may be awarded to punish and deter particularly egregious or reckless conduct
Generally require a higher standard of proof (clear and convincing evidence)
Damages for future losses (ongoing medical care, reduced earning capacity) must be proven with reasonable certainty
Often requires expert testimony and complex calculations
Collateral source rule: plaintiffs can recover full damages even if they received compensation from other sources (insurance, gifts)
Mitigation of damages: plaintiffs have a duty to take reasonable steps to minimize their losses
Failure to mitigate can reduce the recoverable damages
Damages caps: some jurisdictions limit non-economic or punitive damages by statute
Defenses: How to Dodge Liability
Contributory negligence: historically a complete bar to recovery if the plaintiff's own negligence contributed to the injury
Harsh rule, now abandoned in most jurisdictions
Comparative negligence: apportions fault between the plaintiff and defendant
Pure comparative negligence allows the plaintiff to recover even if they were more at fault than the defendant
Modified comparative negligence bars recovery if the plaintiff's fault exceeds a certain threshold (50% or 51%)
Assumption of risk: plaintiff voluntarily and knowingly encountered a known danger
Express assumption of risk through written waivers or contracts
Implied assumption of risk based on the plaintiff's conduct and awareness
Statute of limitations: time limit for filing a negligence claim, varies by jurisdiction and type of case
Discovery rule may delay the start of the limitations period until the plaintiff knew or should have known of the injury and its cause
Immunity defenses: some defendants are shielded from liability due to their status or role
Sovereign immunity for governmental entities, qualified immunity for public officials
Charitable immunity for non-profit organizations, varying by jurisdiction
Real-World Examples: Negligence in Action
Slip and fall cases: property owners failing to address hazardous conditions (wet floors, icy sidewalks)
Key issues: notice of the condition, reasonableness of the owner's actions
Medical malpractice: healthcare providers deviating from the accepted standard of care
Common examples: misdiagnosis, surgical errors, medication mistakes
Product liability: manufacturers or sellers putting defective or unreasonably dangerous products on the market
Design defects, manufacturing defects, failure to warn
Distracted driving: drivers causing accidents due to texting, eating, or other inattentive behavior
Evolving standards as technology advances and laws adapt
Professional negligence: attorneys missing filing deadlines, accountants making errors on tax returns
Judged against the standard of care for the specific profession
Negligent security: businesses failing to provide adequate safety measures in high-crime areas
Foreseeability of criminal activity is a central factor
Key Takeaways: Don't Forget These!
Negligence requires duty, breach, causation, and damages – all four elements must be proven
Special relationships and circumstances can create heightened duties of care
Exceptions to the duty of care include no general duty to rescue, the fireman's rule, and the economic loss rule
Causation involves both but-for cause and proximate cause, with foreseeability as a key factor
Damages can be economic, non-economic, or punitive, and may involve complex calculations for future losses
Defenses to negligence include comparative negligence, assumption of risk, statutes of limitations, and immunities
Negligence principles apply across a wide range of real-world scenarios, from slip and falls to professional malpractice
Always consider the specific facts and circumstances of each case, as well as the applicable jurisdiction's laws and precedents