Proximate Cause and Liability Quiz

Proximate Cause: Limiting Liability

• Proximate cause cuts off liability for consequences not directly linked to the initial negligent act, even if a "but for" cause exists. Unforeseeable consequences are generally not considered proximately caused.

Unforeseeable Consequences

• Exception: A defendant can be liable for unforeseeable injuries resulting from a physical injury to the plaintiff. This exception relates to the causation element rather than proximate cause.
• Thin Skull Doctrine: A defendant is liable for unforeseeable consequences arising from the plaintiff's pre-existing physical condition.

Approaches to Proximate Causation

• Direct Causation Approach (Andrews): Liability extends to unbroken consequences from the initial negligent act, even if unforeseeable, as long as some foreseeable harm was caused. The chain's end is determined pragmatically by common sense and precedent. The Polemis case illustrates this, where a dropped board ignited the ship, even though the explosion was unforeseen.
• Foreseeability Approach (Cardozo): Liability only exists for foreseeable consequences from the defendant's perspective. The exact manner of harm need not be foreseeable, but the general type of harm must be. The Palsgraf case exemplifies this, where the harm to a person on the other side of the train station was deemed unforeseeable.

Intervening Causes

• Intervening causes are forces that occur after or simultaneously with the defendant's negligence, contributing to the harm. These often operate concurrently with the initial cause, thus sharing responsibility for the injury.

• Superseding Intervening Cause: An intervening action that completely relieves the original defendant of liability. This will not be the case if the risk of the intervening cause was foreseeable.

• Examples not constituting a superseding cause: Responses to the initial action (escape, rescue, medical treatment), where the same general type of harm was foreseeable but not the exact method of injury, and some intervening causes (good Samaritan).

• Act of God (Vis Major): An intervening act of nature that, if extraordinary and different from expected dangers, releases the original defendant from liability.

• Intervening Intentional or Criminal Conduct:

  • Generally: Common law often views this as a superseding cause.
  • Exceptions: Liability can be maintained if the risk of such conduct was foreseeable part of the initial negligence. Examples include duties to protect the plaintiff, affirmative actions by the defendant that create an increased risk, or placing the plaintiff in dangerous situations.

Rescue Doctrine

• Conditions for Liability: Allows rescuers to sue those causing the peril if: defendant's negligence caused the peril, the peril was imminent, a rational person would reasonably perceive the situation as perilous, and the rescuer acted reasonably.

Shifting Responsibility

• Usually, the failure of a third party to intervene and mitigate risk doesn't relieve the negligent party of responsibility.

Social Host Liability

• Generally, social hosts are not held liable for harm resulting from alcohol served to adults at their events.

Test your knowledge on the concept of proximate cause in negligence law. This quiz covers key elements such as unforeseeable consequences, the Thin Skull Doctrine, and approaches to causation. Understand how liability can be limited in various scenarios related to injuries.