Page 21

Question 1

Who are the people that are considered emergency rescuers under the firefighters’ rule?

Answer 1

• EMTs
• police officers
• lifeguards
• publicly employed professional risk takers

Question 2

Why does the firefighters rule not apply for negligence that happens after the rescue or undisclosed/unanticipated dangerous conditions on the property?

Answer 2

Because a rescuer is a licensee, so the possessor has a duty to warn of concealed dangers

Question 3

Does the firefighters rule apply to private citizens that help in an emergency?

Answer 3

No

Question 4

Does the firefighters rule apply to rescuers that are off duty?

Answer 4

No

Question 5

Does the firefighters rule apply to risks that are not inherent in the job?

Answer 5

No

Question 6

If you get bitten by a dog while fighting a fire, is that injury included in the firefighters rule?

Answer 6

No, because that wouldn’t be a risk that was inherent in the job

Question 7

If a licensee or trespasser is discovered by the landowner in a position of peril, what must the landowner do?

Answer 7

Use ORDINARY care to avoid injuring him

Question 8

What is a privileged entrant?

Answer 8

Even with no express or implied invitation, certain people are privileged to enter:

• cops
• firefighters
• census takers
• private people under necessity

They are classified as licensees or invitees depending on their purpose

Question 9

What is the recreational use immunity?

Answer 9

Landlords have immunity from nonpaying users of their land that do recreational activities on it with their tacit approval, and are only liable for gross negligence or willful/wanton conduct

Question 10

What are things that are included in recreation for the recreational use immunity?

Answer 10

Fishing, hunting, motorcycling, snowmobiling, outdoor activities, etc.

Question 11

Does the possessor have a duty of care to keep the premises safe for entry or give warning for recreational use immunity?

Answer 11

No, but if the user has paid to enter or was expressly invited, then he does

Question 12

What is the rationale behind the recreational use immunity?

Answer 12

The law wants to encourage landowners to open their land for the public’s use

Question 13

If the location of an injury isn’t on property that is being used for recreation, but on property that was a means to get to the recreational property, does the recreational use immunity apply?

Answer 13

No

Question 14

If someone is on the land for a purpose other than recreation and gets injured there, does it matter that his purpose wasn’t recreation in order for the recreational use immunity to apply?

Answer 14

No, as long as he was engaged in recreational pursuits that were permitted on the land

Question 15

What are the two different approaches to the status of people on land?

Answer 15

Status approach and unitary standard approach

Question 16

What is the unitary standard approach?

Answer 16

Uses a generalized reasonable person standard regardless of an entrant’s status

Question 17

What is the test for the unitary standard approach?

Answer 17

Whether the occupier has acted as a reasonable person in the management of his property in view of the likelihood of injury to others

Question 18

What is the rationale behind the unitary standard approach?

Answer 18

A man’s life/limb isn’t any less worthy of protection just because he is a trespasser

Question 19

What is the duty owed under the unitary standard approach to people outside the land?

Answer 19

No duty for natural conditions on the land, even if the possessor knows it creates a serious risk of harm. There is a recognized duty for artificial conditions or activities

Question 20

What are the factors that influence a duty in the unitary standard approach?

Answer 20

• Plaintiff’s status
• foreseeability of harm
• relationship between the defendant’s conduct and plaintiff’s injury
• moral blameworthiness of the defendant’s conduct
• availability of insurance

Question 21

What is the exception to the unitary standard approach?

Answer 21

Trees in urban areas (duty of reasonable care to make sure trees on the property don’t pose unreasonable risks to people outside the land).

Question 22

What is causation for negligence?

Answer 22

Must prove actual cause and proximate causation

Question 23

What is actual causation’s other name?

Answer 23

Cause in fact

Question 24

What is actual causation?

Answer 24

Plaintiff’s injury is a direct result of defendant’s conduct

Question 25

If someone would have been injured regardless of the defendant's act, is he the cause in fact?

Answer 25

No, so he wouldn't be liable

Question 26

What are the legal tests that can be used to show actual causation?

Answer 26

- but-for test - substantial factor test - Summers v Tice test - market share liability

Question 27

What is the majority approach to actual causation?

Answer 27

The but-for test

Question 28

What is the but-for test?

Answer 28

Plaintiff must prove by preponderance of the evidence that but for the defendant's act, he wouldn't have suffered the damage

Question 29

When is the "but-for" test most useful?

Answer 29

When there's only one cause of injury

Question 30

If you take people out on your boat, don't give them a life jacket, and they drown, under the "but-for" test would you be the actual cause of death?

Answer 30

Yes, if they wouldn't have drown "but-for" you not giving them life jackets

Question 31

If there are multiple tortfeasors, what are the different ways to deal with the causation in negligence for that?

Answer 31

- successive liability - concurrent liability - jointly engaged tortfeasors - substantial factor test

Question 32

What is successive liability in negligence?

Answer 32

Successive independent acts of negligence that contribute to the plaintiff's injuries

Question 33

How does successive liability relate to the "but-for" test for causation for negligence?

Answer 33

If an injury comes from multiple defendants acting independently, each defendant is the "but -or" cause unless a particular one can show that his conduct caused only identified injury

Question 34

If you negligently pull out in front of someone who slams into you, and another who wasn't watching slams into that person, who are the "but for" causes of the injuries?

Answer 34

Both are liable

Question 35

What is concurrent liability?

Answer 35

If injury comes from more than one defendant, and the conduct of each defendant taken alone would not have been enough to cause injury, each is regarded as the "but for" cause

Question 36

If there's a collision of two cars that injures a pedestrian and both drivers are negligent, who can the pedestrian recover from?

Answer 36

Either or both for any injuries

Question 37

What are jointly engaged tortfeasors?

Answer 37

When injury is inflicted by one of many defendants that are jointly engaged in negligent conduct, each is liable even though only one actually inflicted injury

Question 38

If there is an illegal drag race that results in an injured bystander, who is liable?

Answer 38

Every participant even though only one injured the person

Question 39

What is the substantial factor test?

Answer 39

When two or more defendants cause injury, but each person's acts taken alone would have been enough to cause the injury

Question 40

What does the P have to prove for the substantial factor test?

Answer 40

That the defendant's act was a substantial/material factor that caused the injury

Question 41

When is the substantial factor test especially good?

Answer 41

For cases that have more than one cause

Question 42

If someone starts a fire on the right side of your house and another person starts one on the left, and your house is destroyed, which causation test should be used to figure out liability?

Answer 42

The "but for" test doesn't work because the plaintiff can prove the injury would've happened even if he hadn't acted, so the substantial factor test is the best.

Question 43

What is the "Summers v Tice" test for proximate cause for negligence?

Answer 43

The plaintiff has the initial burden to establish that both defendants breached a duty of care, then the burden is on the tortfeasors to prove that they were not the ones that injured the plaintiff

Question 44

When is the "Summers v Tice" test especially applicable?

Answer 44

When there's more than one D and you don't know who is responsible

Question 45

If a defendant can show he wasn't the one that injured the plaintiff under the Summers v Tice test, what happens?

Answer 45

He is absolved from liability

Question 46

If both of the defendants can't show that they weren't the ones that injured the plaintiff under the Summers v Tice test, what happens?

Answer 46

They are held joint and severally liable

Question 47

What is the firefighter's rule?

Answer 47

This bars recovery for most injuries against the negligent creator of an emergency the rescuer is responding to but doesn't bar recovery for negligence that happens after the rescuer reaches the scene or for undisclosed and unanticipated dangerous conditions on the property