Negligence: Duty, Breach, Causation

Question 1

An express or implied desire to perform a particular act; a state of mind (to do the act) preceding or accompanying the act. The defendant’s act itself must be expressly or implicitly intended; the resulting harm need not be intended but must have been reasonably foreseeable

Answer 1

Intent

Question 2

holds that if the defendant does an act with the knowledge that it is substantially certain to produce a particular result, the defendant is deemed to have intended the result and is liable for his act

Answer 2

Substantial Certainty Doctrine

Question 3

applicable when a defendant, while in the process of committing a tort against one person, unintentionally harms a third person or commits a different tort. In such a case, the
defendant’s wrongful intent is transferred to include the unintended victim or tortious act.

Answer 3

Transferred Intent Doctrine

Question 4

a person who has an express or implied invitation to enter
property for the purpose for which the property is maintained.

Answer 4

Invitee

Question 5

a person who has express or implied permission to enter business property to do business with the land occupier

Answer 5

Business Invitee

Question 6

Someone who enters property in the possession of another for the purpose for which the property is held open to the public. It is not required that a business purpose be involved. Public employees acting within the scope of their official duties are included in the category.

Answer 6

Public Invitee

Question 7

A person who enters property with the express or implied
permission of the land occupier. Such entry is not for the purpose of doing business.

Answer 7

Licensee

Question 8

Someone who enters the real property of another
without express or implied consent.

Answer 8

Trespasser

Question 9

Someone who conveys real or personal property by lease.

Answer 9

Lessor

Question 10

Someone who has a possessory interest in real or personal property under a lease.

Answer 10

Lessee

Question 11

Latin for “the thing speaks for itself”; a torts doctrine excusing the requirement that a plaintiff prove the defendant negligent if, under certain conditions, the fact of the negligence is obvious, and the defendant had exclusive control of the
instrument causing the injury

Answer 11

Res ipsa loquitur

Question 12

The cause without which the event could not have occurred.

Answer 12

Actual Cause or Cause in Fact

Question 13

used to establish actual cause. To apply the test, the plaintiff must show that but for the defendant’s act, the plaintiff would not have been injured

Answer 13

But for Test

Question 14

The principle test that causation exists when the defendant’s conduct is an important or significant contributor to the plaintiff’s injuries.

Answer 14

Substantial Factor Test

Question 15

literally means “without which not.” The term relates to
the “But For” Test in that if a defendant’s act is this of a plaintiff’s harm, then the plaintiff’s harm would not have occurred in the absence of that act.

Answer 15

Sine qua non

Question 16

A cause that is legally sufficient to result in liability; an act or
omission that is considered in law to result in a consequence, so that liability can be imposed on the actor. Also, a cause that directly produces an event and without which the event would not have occurred.

Answer 16

Proximate Cause

Question 17

A cause of an accident or injury that occurs between the defendant’s behavior and the injurious result, but that does not change the defendant’s liability.

Answer 17

Dependent Intervening Act

Question 18

An act which would have occurred even in the absence of the original negligence. It breaks the chain of causation unless the act or its result was foreseeable in light of the original negligent act.

Answer 18

Independent Intervening Act

Question 19

Under this rule an exception is made to the general rule that an unforeseeable result of the defendant’s act may break the chain of causation and negate liability. The defendant “takes his plaintiff as he finds him” in that the defendant will be liable even where his act produces an unforeseeable result if that
result is due to the plaintiff’s uncommon reaction or physical defect.

Answer 19

Thin Skull Plaintiff Rule also called the
Eggshell Plaintiff Rule

Question 20

Liability for this, requires proof of a duty of care owed by the defendant to the plaintiff, a breach of that duty, and that the breach was the actual and proximate cause of damages suffered by the plaintiff.

Answer 20

Negligence

Question 21

The general rule of duty holds that everyone owes a duty to exercise due care so as not to subject others to unreasonable risks of harm.

Answer 21

General Duty

Question 22

Under Palsgraf v. Long Island Railroad Co., the majority opinion held that a defendant owes a duty only to those who
could foreseeably be endangered by the defendant’s negligent act. Therefore, according to the rule, there is no duty owed to a plaintiff who is in a position of apparent safety when the defendant commits a negligent act. This is the so-called
“orbit of danger” test.

Answer 22

Cardozo Rule on Duty

Question 23

In the Palsgraf case, Justice Andrews the minority dissenting
opinion which has been applied as the majority opinion in other cases. It was argued that if the defendant owes a duty to anyone, then he owes a duty to everyone who could foreseeably be injured by his action.

Answer 23

Andrews Rule on Duty

Question 24

the elements of duty and breach are proved when a defendant violates a safety statute which was intended to protect the class of people to which the plaintiff belongs from the kind of injury the defendant caused.

Answer 24

Negligence Per Se

Question 25

substantial failure, without excuse, to perform a legal duty

Answer 25

nonfeasance

Question 26

a person who embarks upon the performance of services for another, whether gratuitously or for consideration, is under a duty to render those services with due care. This person, however, is under no duty to complete the performance of the services unless abandonment would prejudice the other party’s position. The rendering of aid in an emergency constitutes the performance of services, and a duty of care is imposed upon those who undertake to render such aid.

Answer 26

Duty Owed by a Good Samaritan

Question 27

A person whose negligence creates a situation in which
he needs to be rescued may be held liable for injuries incurred by his rescuer

Answer 27

Duty Owed to a Rescuer

Question 28

a cause of action which is brought by a plaintiff who suffered injury because a child or other person was inadequately supervised by one who owed a duty of supervision. Most commonly, it is brought against parents who failed to exercise ordinary parental discretion as to the manner in which their child is supervised or cared for.

Answer 28

Negligent Supervision

Question 29

A land occupier owes a duty of ordinary care to these people, which includes reasonably inspecting the land for dangerous conditions and repairing those dangerous conditions which a reasonable inspection would reveal.

Answer 29

Duty Owed to an Invitee

Question 30

A landowner owes a duty of ordinary care to these people,
which includes either 1) warning them of known dangerous conditions, unless they are obvious or already known to the them, or 2) repairing dangerous conditions to make the property safe.

Answer 30

Duty Owed to a Licensee

Question 31

The land occupier generally owes no duty of care to these people unless this person is a constant member of this group upon a limited area or a child to whom the Attractive Nuisance Doctrine applies

Answer 31

Duty Owed to a Trespassor

Question 32

recognized in most jurisdictions, imposes a duty upon land occupiers for the protection of young children whose trespasses are to be anticipated and whose immaturity renders them particularly susceptible to injury from dangerous conditions on the land. The land occupier owes a duty of reasonable care to eliminate a danger or to otherwise
protect children when the following elements are present

Answer 32

Attractive Nuisance Doctrine

Question 33

The land occupier owes a duty to maintain the premises in a reasonably safe condition for the protection of passersby
and occupiers of adjoining premises. This includes the duty of inspection to discover and correct those defects which a reasonable inspection would reveal.

Answer 33

Duty Owed to a Person off the Premises

Question 34

The land occupier owes a duty of reasonable care as to natural conditions, at least in those situations where the condition is known to the landowner

Answer 34

Duty Owed with Regard to Natural Conditions on Land

Question 35

the failure to perform one’s duty that is owed to another.

Answer 35

Breach of Duty