This preview shows pages 1–3. Sign up to view the full content.
This preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.View Full Document
Unformatted text preview: Friday October 9 th Negligent Torts (cont) Elements necessary to prove: 1. Act or failure to act 2. Duty to Due Care 3. Breach of Duty to Due Care 4. Proximate Cause 5. Damages occurred as a result 4 th Element: Proximate Cause Was the harm sustained by the plaintiff substantially caused by the defendants negligence? Two categories: 1. Direct Causation: injuries sustained that are directly related to negligence of defendant (E.g. A man has a heart attack after getting upset that we had an accident Defendant is responsible b/c the law states you take your victim as you find them) Although in this situation, an average reasonable man could not foresee this occurring; it is still a DIRECT cause of my negligence. 2. Indirect Causation: intervening forces that cause injury due to defendants negligence (E.g. someone comes to scene of accident and pulls victim of defendants negligence out of car and hurts them even more) Two kinds: a. Dependent Intervening Forces- originally negligent forces- Defendant is liable for all injuries caused by D.I.F. that an average reasonable man could foresee occurring E.g. Rescuer pulls victim from a car causing paralysis- defendant is liable because we can foresee a rescuer coming to scene ( if rescuer did not act as an average reasonable man they too could be come liableknown as JOINT & SEVERAL LIABILITY) b. Independent Intervening Forces- Defendant is not liable for injuries caused by I.I.F because an average reasonable man could not foresee them coming E.g. A patient next to the plaintiff in the hospital they were rushed to wakes up in the middle of the night and stabs plaintiff several times-defendant is not liable because we would never foresee this occurring Monday Oct 12 th 5 th element: Damages result from breach of Duty of Due Care In negligent torts, normally do not see Putative damages involved, just Compensatory.-Injury involved due to negligence of defendant generally must be an actual physical injury or property damage. *When a defendant is a careless wrongdoer, not an intentional wrongdoer, plaintiff usually cannot recover for fright, shock, or other emotional disturbances which did not result in harmful physical consequences to the plaintiff. Doctorine of Res Ipsa Loquitur shift of burden of proof from plaintiff to defendant--As a result of this doctorine, a presumption of negligence is raised and the burden of proving that proper care was used is placed upon the defendant. Negligent Torts Common Defenses: 1. Contributory Negligence: even though a defendants negligence causes an accident resulting in an injury to a plaintiff, the plaintiff generally cannot recover if his own failure to use proper care is a contributing cause of the accident....
View Full Document
This note was uploaded on 02/15/2012 for the course BLAW 101 taught by Professor Staff during the Fall '10 term at Texas State.
- Fall '10