1. Juries determine attributes that represent community norms 2. Definition is impossible to nail down 3. Deviations from the RPP standard 1. Standard doesn’t change but has deviations or flexibilities 1. Emergency 2. Physical conditions 3. Superior skills or knowledge 4. Mental conditions 2. Different classes of R.P.P’s 1. Minors 2. Elderly
3. Mentally Disabled 4. Standard of care 1. Way of referring to the nature or extent or the duty that is owed 1. Requires one to: 1. Recognize risks or dangers a reasonable person would recognize AND 2. Act in a way to minimize those risks as a reasonable and prudent person would act 3. i.e., need to recognize and act accordingly 2. Measuring the standard of care 1. The standard of the reasonable person remains the same whether the danger is great or small 1. ∆ must exercise a greater degree of care if the danger is greater 2. There is a difference between standard and degree- difference of degree doesn’t change the standard 1. e.x. ginsu knife storage v. Butter knife storage 3. Emergency doctrine 1. Standard of a reasonable person whose judgment is diminished by the circumstance of emergency 1. Allows for R.P.P., but still w/in emergency situations 2. Emergency can’t be created by the actor 3. Definition: An event that requires a decision within an extremely short duration and that is sufficiently unusual so that the actor can’t draw on a ready body of personal experience or general community knowledge as to which choice of conduct is best 4. NOT A FREE PASS FOR DEFENDANT 5. Limitations 1. Unavailable where ∆ ’s tortious conduct contributed to the creation of the emergency 2. Unavailable in some instances where a ∆ fails to anticipate an emergency 4. Even if there is a law that allows you to do something, if the circumstance changes, one must change actions (R.P.P standard changes with circumstances) 5. Physical Conditions 1. ∆ ’s own physical qualities are generally taken into account 1. Easily measured and perceived as tangible 2. Standard of care will reflect actor’s physical condition (if you knew) 1. What did you know and what did you do to conform your actions to that? 1. i.e., seizure for the 1st time v. Seizure for the xth time 3. Not considered a free pass for the ∆ 2. Intoxication
1. Voluntary intoxication is not a defense or considered a valid physical impairment 6. Mental Conditions 1. Traditional, majority view 1. Mental Disability is irrelevant for purposes of negligence liability 2. People with mental conditions/cognitive disabilities are held to the same standard as those that are sane and of normal intelligence 2. Modern trend 1. Uses R.P.P standard when person with mental disability is ∆ , but gives more flexibility when they are π 1. Furthers the compensation role of torts 7. Superior Skills or Knowledge 1. Where an individual has certain superior knowledge or sill in a certain area, the law expects that person to use the knowledge to benefit others (not talking about professionals/ people with degrees, but instead talking
You've reached the end of your free preview.
Want to read all 30 pages?
- Fall '07