Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 456 views

    Proximate Cause

    Uploaded by

    Lu Cas
    To prove negligence in a personal injury case, the plaintiff must show that the defendant's actions were both the actual and proximate cause of the injuries. Proximate cause exists when the injury was a reasonably foreseeable result of the negligent behavior. For example, if a truck driver crashes into a house and a piece of plaster falls and injures the homeowner inside, the driver's negligence is the proximate cause. However, if the homeowner later leaves and is attacked by a rabid dog, the original accident is not the proximate cause since being attacked was not a foreseeable result of the crash.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Proximate Cause

    Uploaded by

    Lu Cas
    456 views3 pages
    To prove negligence in a personal injury case, the plaintiff must show that the defendant's actions were both the actual and proximate cause of the injuries. Proximate cause exists when the injury was a reasonably foreseeable result of the negligent behavior. For example, if a truck driver crashes into a house and a piece of plaster falls and injures the homeowner inside, the driver's negligence is the proximate cause. However, if the homeowner later leaves and is attacked by a rabid dog, the original accident is not the proximate cause since being attacked was not a foreseeable result of the crash.

    Original Description:

    Proximate Cause

    Original Title

    proximate cause

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    To prove negligence in a personal injury case, the plaintiff must show that the defendant's actions were both the actual and proximate cause of the injuries. Proximate cause exists when the injury was a reasonably foreseeable result of the negligent behavior. For example, if a truck driver crashes into a house and a piece of plaster falls and injures the homeowner inside, the driver's negligence is the proximate cause. However, if the homeowner later leaves and is attacked by a rabid dog, the original accident is not the proximate cause since being attacked was not a foreseeable result of the crash.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    456 views3 pages

    Proximate Cause

    Uploaded by

    Lu Cas
    To prove negligence in a personal injury case, the plaintiff must show that the defendant's actions were both the actual and proximate cause of the injuries. Proximate cause exists when the injury was a reasonably foreseeable result of the negligent behavior. For example, if a truck driver crashes into a house and a piece of plaster falls and injures the homeowner inside, the driver's negligence is the proximate cause. However, if the homeowner later leaves and is attacked by a rabid dog, the original accident is not the proximate cause since being attacked was not a foreseeable result of the crash.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 3

    Proximate Cause.

    In order to win a personal injury action, a plaintiff


    must prove that a defendant's negligence caused the plaintiff's injuries.
    ... In other words, proximate cause exists when the injury is the
    foreseeable result of the negligence. For example, a truck driver
    negligently crashes into a house.

    Proximate Cause

    In order to win a personal injury action, a plaintiff must prove that a


    defendant's negligence caused the plaintiff's injuries. In negligence law,
    there are two types of causation:

    (1) "cause in fact"; and


    (2) "proximate cause."

    The plaintiff must prove both types of causation.


    A negligent act is the proximate cause of a plaintiff's injury if the
    injury is the natural and probable result of the act. In other words,
    proximate cause exists when the injury is the foreseeable result of the
    negligence. For example, a truck driver negligently crashes into a
    house. Due to the impact, a piece of plaster falls from the ceiling of a
    house and onto the homeowner, injuring him. The truck driver's
    negligence is the proximate cause of the homeowner's injury because
    injury to an occupant of the house is a foreseeable result of crashing a
    truck into the house. Note that the particular injury and the manner
    in which the injury occurs do not have to be foreseeable in order to
    constitute proximate cause. Crashing into the house is the proximate
    cause of the homeowner's injury because it was foreseeable that some
    sort of injury would occur. A second example: a bicycle rider
    negligently runs into a pedestrian. The pedestrian is uninjured but
    stunned. He walks around the block to clear his head, and he is
    injured by a rabid dog. In this scenario, the bicycle rider's negligence is
    not the proximate cause of the pedestrian's injury because being
    attacked by a dog is not the foreseeable result of a bicycle accident.

    Concurrent Causes
    When two or more negligent acts contribute to a plaintiff's injuries,
    those acts are called "concurrent causes." For example, a pedestrian
    stands on a street corner. A bicycle rider negligently runs into the
    pedestrian, knocking him into the street. As a truck swerves to avoid
    the pedestrian, a piano falls from the truck and onto the pedestrian,
    injuring him. Before the accident, the truck driver negligently failed to
    secure the piano to the truck. The negligent acts of the bicycle rider
    and the truck driver are concurrent causes because both acts
    contributed to the pedestrian's injuries.
    When there are concurrent causes, both negligent actors will be liable
    for the plaintiff's injury only if each negligent act was a substantial
    factor in causing the injury. In the above example, the pedestrian's
    injury would not have occurred if not for the negligent acts of both the
    bicycle rider and the truck driver. Therefore, the negligent acts of both
    the bicycle rider and the truck driver were substantial factors in
    causing the pedestrian's injury, and both of them would be liable for
    damages in the pedestrian's personal injury action.

    Intervening and Superseding Causes


    An "intervening cause" or "superseding cause" breaks the chain of
    causation between a negligent act and a plaintiff's injury. For example,
    a truck driver negligently crashes into a house. The impact breaks a
    window but does not injure the homeowner. Later that night, a burglar
    crawls through the broken window and assaults the homeowner. The
    homeowner files a personal injury action against the truck driver to
    recover for the injuries that were inflicted by the burglar. In this case,
    the burglar's conduct was not a foreseeable result of the truck driver's
    negligence. Therefore, the burglar's conduct was an intervening or
    superseding cause. The truck driver's negligence was not the proximate
    cause of the homeowner's injuries, so the homeowner cannot recover
    damages from the truck driver in a personal injury action.

    You might also like