CAUSATION

1
CAUSATION

• THE BREACH OF DUTY MUST BE THE ACTUAL AND
  PROXIMATE CAUSE OF THE PLAINTIFFS INJURIES

2
ACTUAL CAUSE

• Actual cause - factual cause and effect
  relationship between the negligent act and the
  plaintiffs damages
• BUT FOR TEST
• Can we say but for the negligence the plaintiff
  would not have been injured
• SUBSTANTIAL FACTOR TEST concurring causes

3
PROXIMATE CAUSE

• Negligent act must be a foreseeable cause of
  the plaintiffs injuries
• Zone of danger test
• Intervening causes must be foreseeable if not
  they are considered Superseding causes that
  break chain of causation

4
NEGLIGENCE - DEFENSES

• CONTRIBUTORY AND COMPARATIVE NEGLIGENCE
• ASSUMPTION OF RISK

5
CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE

• FAULT ON THE PART OF THE PLAINTIFF THAT
  CONTRIBUTED TO HIS/HER INJURIES
• ABSOLUTE DEFENSE (BAR TO RECOVERY) AT COMMON LAW
  REGARDLESS OF THE RELATIVE DEGREES OF FAULT

6
COMPARATIVE NEGLIGENCE

• SYSTEM UNDER WHICH THE JURY COMPARES THE
  RELATIVE FAULT OF THE PLAINTIFF AND DEFENDANT AND
  AWARDS DAMAGES TO THE PLAINTIFF BASED ON
  DEFENDANTS FAULT

7
PURE COMPARATIVE NEGLIGENCE

• PLAINTIFF RECEIVES DAMAGES REGARDLESS OF THE
  PERCENTAGE OF NEGLIGENCE ATTRIBUTED TO THE
  DEFENDANT

8
MODIFIED COMPARATIVE NEGLIGENCE

• DEFENDANTS NEGLIGENCE MUST USUALLY BE GREATER
  THAN (49 RULE) PLAINTIFFS NEGLIGENCE FOR THE
  PLAINTIFF TO RECOVER DAMAGES

9
ASSUMPTION OF RISK

• PLAINTIFF MUST HAVE KNOWLEDGE OF RISK OF
  NEGLIGENCE
• PLAINTIFF MUST VOLUNTARILY ASSUME THE RISK BY
  WORDS (EXPRESS) OR CONDUCT (IMPLIED)