Introduction to Negligence and Liability

Podcast

Play an AI-generated podcast conversation about this lesson

Questions and Answers

What does P argue for in terms of negligence standards?

Strict liability standard

Individual intelligence standard

No specific standard proposed

Reasonably prudent person standard (correct)

Which of the following is NOT a reason favoring a reasonably prudent person standard over individual intelligence?

Better protection of property ownership

Predictability in behavior

Avoiding individual capacity complications

Accessibility of intelligence tests (correct)

What does the term 'Ex Ante' refer to in negligence cases?

Prediction of an event before it happens (correct)

Judgment after the event has occurred

Clear rule application

Standard evaluation of behavior

What is a significant problem mentioned regarding juries and their decision-making?

Inconsistent interpretations of what is considered reasonable Signup and view all the answers

According to the content, what is a characteristic of a 'rule' compared to a 'standard'?

More consistent and objective Signup and view all the answers

Which of the following is a potential issue with applying a strict rule-like standard in negligence cases?

It may produce absurd results when applied consistently Signup and view all the answers

What formula is mentioned in the context of moving away from traditional standards in negligence evaluation?

BPL formula Signup and view all the answers

In the context of deterrence, why is it important for caretakers or individuals with lower intelligence to monitor behaviors?

To prevent potential negligent behaviors Signup and view all the answers

What does ex post refer to in tort law?

An assessment of actions after harm has occurred. Signup and view all the answers

How can ex ante actions impose costs on businesses?

By requiring safety enhancements to prevent accidents. Signup and view all the answers

In Palsgraf v. Long Island Railroad, what was the main focus of the case?

The foreseeability of harm prior to the incident. Signup and view all the answers

What does the Hand Formula emphasize in negligence cases?

Balancing the costs of prevention against potential harm. Signup and view all the answers

Which of the following best describes the 'Reasonable Prudent Person' standard?

The behavior of a typical member of the community under similar circumstances. Signup and view all the answers

What is one characteristic of strict liability principles?

It emphasizes risk mitigation over fault-finding. Signup and view all the answers

What does the 'Negligence' formula emphasize in relation to a breach?

The roles of customs in determining negligence. Signup and view all the answers

What is the primary goal of tort law when focusing on ex ante measures?

To prevent harm before it occurs through proactive measures. Signup and view all the answers

What was a key factor in the court's holding in Davis v. Feinstein?

P's efforts to compensate for his blindness Signup and view all the answers

In terms of liability, what does the court aim to achieve according to the ruling?

To incentivize reasonable precautions to lower social costs Signup and view all the answers

What does the Rule of Sevens imply about children under age 7?

They are assumed incapable of negligence. Signup and view all the answers

Which of the following statements is true regarding the consideration of physical versus mental capabilities in court?

Courts are more likely to change standards based on physical characteristics. Signup and view all the answers

What precaution could have been taken by D to potentially avoid liability in this case?

Installing a visible barrier at the cellar door Signup and view all the answers

How does the cause of P's fall illustrate the court’s stance on disabilities?

The standard of care is adjusted based on physical disabilities. Signup and view all the answers

What does the holding in Davis v. Feinstein suggest about expectations for people with disabilities?

They may require accommodations to safely navigate environments. Signup and view all the answers

What overarching principle can be derived from the liability standard applied in the case?

Reasonable care must consider individual capabilities. Signup and view all the answers

What justification might have allowed Eckert to negotiate a deal with RR?

Eckert offered to save the kid if compensated. Signup and view all the answers

In the context of Eckert's decision-making, which factor outweighs the expected cost according to the economics mentioned?

Expected benefits of rescue. Signup and view all the answers

What type of analysis is crucial when assessing liability in cases similar to Margharita's situation?

BPL (Benefit-Prediction-Liability) analysis. Signup and view all the answers

What was Margharita's main argument against the ship owners?

They neglected to deviate for his medical care. Signup and view all the answers

What incident led to Martinez's injury while on the Margharita?

A shark attack. Signup and view all the answers

Which of the following best summarizes the BPL approach as discussed?

It analyzes human suffering in relation to economic losses. Signup and view all the answers

What was a significant consequence of the approach taken by the Margharita after Martinez's incident?

The ship continued on its course without detours. Signup and view all the answers

What factor is NOT typically considered in the BPL approach?

Legal repercussions for ship owners. Signup and view all the answers

In the context of liability, what standard are minors held to when engaged in activities normally undertaken by adults?

They are held to an adult standard of care. Signup and view all the answers

What factors determine that a minor should be held to an adult standard of care?

The activity involves inherent risks and is usually performed by adults. Signup and view all the answers

Which statement best describes the distinction between the Purtle and Dellwo cases?

The Purtle case involves hunting licenses granted to minors, while Dellwo discusses knowledge of age. Signup and view all the answers

What is one advantage of having standardized practices in different localities?

It reduces the risk of substandard practices being protected by localized norms. Signup and view all the answers

What implication does the case Dellwo have on minor liability for operating vehicles?

Vehicle operation prevents knowing the age of the operator, complicating liability. Signup and view all the answers

Which of the following is a potential disadvantage of applying standardized practices across localities?

Challenges in identifying what constitutes a similar locality. Signup and view all the answers

Under what circumstance is a minor not protected against the imprudence of youth?

If they are warned of potential dangers. Signup and view all the answers

How do standardized practices affect the accountability of professionals?

They help hold professionals accountable across different regions. Signup and view all the answers

Which of the following is a condition for applying the adult standard of care to minors?

They are engaged in a dangerous activity typically undertaken by adults. Signup and view all the answers

What is a key reason why minors operating powerboats could be held liable?

The activity is recognized as dangerous and generally performed by adults. Signup and view all the answers

What challenge may arise from the application of standardized practices in isolated areas?

Unique challenges of these areas might be overlooked. Signup and view all the answers

What is one way minors can be protected from liability during adult activities?

If they are warned about the inherent risks involved. Signup and view all the answers

Standardized practices aim to balance which aspects between rural and urban settings?

Rural and urban standards while maintaining accountability. Signup and view all the answers

Which statement most accurately reflects the outcome of localized norms on substandard practices?

Localized norms can sometimes obscure substandard practices. Signup and view all the answers

What is one reason why determining similar localities can be challenging?

Localities may differ significantly in their standards and challenges. Signup and view all the answers

What benefit do standardized practices provide in relation to professionals' actions?

They ensure that all professionals adhere to a fixed set of rules. Signup and view all the answers

Study Notes

Attack Introduction

Negligence is the reasonable person: a person of ordinary prudence, considering all the surrounding factors.
The Hand Formula (BPL/Cost-Benefit Analysis): Determines whether a precaution is worth the expense: considering if the cost (B) to take a particular precaution is less than the probability (P) of an accident times loss(L) expected from that accident.

Negligence

Custom: a common way in which people behave. Sometimes showing custom helps prove reasonable care or to show lack of it.
Negligence Per Se: An act that violates a law which exists to prevent the sort of harm that occurred. Violation is negligence.
Res Ipsa Loquitur: "The thing speaks for itself" - If an accident occurred in a way that would not normally happen unless someone was careless, the burden of proof shifts to the party (defendant).

Strict Liability

Activity Levels and Respondeat Superior: If someone is doing things for their company at work in a manner that harms another, the company (employers) are likely liable.
Preponderance of the Evidence Rules: This is a basic standard for determining whether a person's actions were truly negligent. It basically means that the evidence must weigh over the other information, and over 50% prove the fact you're trying to prove.
Loss of Chance: a particular type of causation case where P's damages are measured not by whether P survived but the percentage reduction in likelihood of survival or recovery, etc. this occurs when P is already predisposed to a certain injury before the accident occured.
Multiple Defendants: A situation where someone was harmed while more than one person was potentially negligent and responsible. It's a unique area of the law.

Causation

Remoteness and Foreseeability: Whether a defendant could (reasonably) foresee that their negligent act would cause subsequent harm.
Intervening Causes: If an unforeseeable event occurs between the negligent act and the injury, it may break the chain of causation. It is important to use this analysis when determining which party is responsible for harm done.

Damages

Ability to get Damages: Factors that affect whether or not someone brings a lawsuit.
Compensatory Damages: Awarded by courts to compensate people who have been injured by another party's negligence.
Economic Refinements, Insurance, and Intangible Losses. These are types of compensatory damages that include calculating financial loss and pain and suffering.
Punitive Damages: Awarded when a party's conduct has harmed another to a high degree.

Duties and Defenses

Duties from Affirmative Acts, Undertakings, Special Relationships
Duties Arising from Affirmative Acts: An act by the defendant that created a duty where there was none.
Cases where the D has done something (action that harms someone else) and is that something enough to create a duty on D: A specific type of case where there was no prior duty, but some action by the defendant created a new duty and a liability on them.

Mental Abilities

Vaughn v. Menlove: Objective Standard- Reasonable Person.

Physical Disabilities

Examples in Torts.
Key Differences in a Torts Context.
Application in 1L Torts Class

Breach:

Negligence
Strict Liability

Negligence = Duty + Breach

The Reasonable Person

Mental Abilities/Physical Disabilities

Tests for Negligence: reasonable prudent person
Moving away from standards
Mental Abilities
Case: Vaughn v. Menlove.
Case: Fredericks v. Castora
Case: Kerr v. Connecticut Co.
Example in Torts.

Age

General Rule
Rule of Sevens
Exceptions

Products Liability

The Move to Modern Products Liability
Manufacturing Defects
Design Defects
Marketing Defects

Intentional Torts

Battery, Consent, Trespass, Conversion, and False Imprisonment
Privileges and Necessity

Ultrahazardous Activities

Facts & Holding.
Rule and Key Ideas.

Negligent Infliction of Emotional Distress

Facts & Holding
Rule and Key Ideas

Causation: But-For & Proximate Causation

But for causation
Proximate causation
Problems with BPL
Case: NY Central Railroad v. Grimstad
Case: Gardner v. National Bulk Carriers
Case: Stacy v. Knickerbocker Ice

Causation: Multiple Defendants

Doctrine of Alternative Liability
Case: Summers v. Tice
Case: Kingston v. Chicago Northwest Railway
Case: Litzman v. Humboldt
In General

Compensatory damages
Economic Refinements, insurance, and intangible losses
How to measure damages: present, future, loss of enjoyment, diminished value, future costs
Case: Newlin v. NE Telephone (No pure economic loss case)
Case: Madison Gourmet Foods v. Finlandia (Pure economic loss case)

Duty v. Proximate Cause

In General
Policy Concerns
Examples
Policy justifications for a nuanced proximate cause rule
Case: Palsgraf v. Long Island Railroad
Case: Doughty v. Turner

Damages and Discrimination

concerns with bias in damages
Case: Landers v. Ghosh

Additional Notes on Intervening Causes

Proof Problems
Victim Precaution
Activity Levels
Loss of Chance
Full Formula in Context
Cases

Intentional Tort Categories and Elements

Battery
Assault
False Imprisonment
IIED

Studying That Suits You

Use AI to generate personalized quizzes and flashcards to suit your learning preferences.

Description

This quiz explores key concepts of negligence and strict liability in tort law. It covers the reasonable person standard, the Hand Formula for cost-benefit analysis, and principles like negligence per se and res ipsa loquitur. Test your understanding of these fundamental legal doctrines.