o The Substantial Factor Test The defendants tort must have been a substantial

O the substantial factor test the defendants tort

This preview shows page 64 - 66 out of 105 pages.

oThe Substantial-Factor TestThe defendant’s tort must have been a substantial factor in producing the damage complained of.Gyerman v. United States Lines: Substantial Factor Test. Plaintiff unloads boxes that are negligently stacked by the company even though he knows that they are dangerous. However, Defendant’s actions were the substantial factor in the proximate cause, therefore no contributory negligence. oJustly Attachable CauseThe essential question is whether the harm which has been suffered is “justly attachable” to the defendant’s conduct. (p.279) Systems of Rules oAttempts to establish a fixed system of rules to cover all casesEx: defendant is liable if the defendant has created a force which “remained active itself or created another force that remained active until it directly caused the result;” or created anew active risk of being acted upon by the active force that caused the result. o§ 65. Contributory Negligence- 64 -
Background image
conduct on the part of the plaintiff, contributing as a legal cause to the harm he has suffered, which falls below the standard to which he is required to conform for his own protectionoAlthough the defendant has violated his duty, has been negligent, and would otherwise be liable, (p.452) the plaintiff is denied recovery because his own conduct disentitles him to maintain the action. Plaintiff’s action, in some circumstances, is referred to as Proximate Cause, saying that the plaintiff’s negligence is an intervening, or insulating cause between the defendant’s negligence and the result. Contributory negligence is an Autonomy PolicyoEncouraged to exist originally because of three factors:Plaintiff-minded juriesThe tendency of the courts of the day to look for some single, principal dominate “proximate cause”(p.453) Inability of the courts to conceive a satisfactory method by which the damages for a single, individual injury could be apportioned between the parties, so that although both were at fault, the loss simply had to fall entirely upon the negligent plaintiff or upon the negligent defendant. Contributory Negligence is generally determined and governed by the same tests and rules as the negligence of the defendantoEven though Negligence is conduct which creates an undue risk of harm to others while Contributory Negligence is conduct which involves an undue riskof harm to the actor himselfThe Plaintiff is required to conform to the reasonable person standard of ordinary prudence under like circumstances. (p.456) Cause in FactMost courts hold that the plaintiff is not barred unless his negligence, of whatever degree, has been a substantial factor in causing his injury.
Background image
Image of page 66

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture