Unformatted text preview:

Chapter 7 Negligence and Strict Liability Negligence conduct that falls below the level reasonably necessary to protect others against significant risks of harm Negligence law says each person must act as a reasonable person of ordinary prudence reasonable person test reasonable care standard o The defendant owed a duty of care to the plaintiff Plaintiff could foreseeably be at risk of harm stemming from the defendant s activities conduct Special relationship logically calling for a duty existed o The defendant committed a breach of this duty defendant did not act as a reasonable person would broad range of applications Reasonable person test objective Compares the defendant s actions with those that a hypothetical person would have taken in the situation Focuses on the defendant s behavior rather than their subjective mental state o This breach was the actual and proximate cause of injury experienced by the plaintiff damages Personal injury physical bodily injury compensatory Property damage harm to the plaintiff s real estate or a personal property item Car compensatory damages Economic loss business setting loss of profit compensatory damages Was the breach an actual cause of the injury But for test substantial factor test if two people being negligent Was the breach a proximate cause of the injury Don t want to charge the defendant for ALL the injuries if some of them are not due to his negligence Liable for the natural and probable consequences Liable for plaintiffs who were in the scope of the foreseeable risk What was the effect of any intervening cause arising after the breach and helping to cause the injury Negligence law does not require that we protect others against ALL foreseeable risks of harm protect from unreasonable conduct by the defendant how do you determine if unreasonable o Seriousness magnitude o Social utility of the defendant s conduct more valuable less likely that it will be regarded as a breach of duty o Ease of difficulty of avoiding the risk Most tort cases that do not involve intentional torts are governed by the law of negligence Premises liability cases someone who owns land must exercise reasonable care for the safety of his guests Negligence per se the defendant s violation of such laws listed below may create breach of duty and may allow the plaintiff to win the case if the plaintiff was within the class of persons intended to be protected by the law and suffered harm that the law was intended to protect against o Courts sometimes use statues ordinances and administrative regulations to determine how a reasonable person would behave Intervening causes o If an act force or event happens after the defendant s act of negligence that contributes to the plaintiff s injury was unforeseeable the defendant is not liable Negligent defendants normally are liable for diseases contracted by their victims while in a weakened state caused by their injuries Res ipsa loquitur the thing speaks for itself applies when o The defendant has exclusive control of the instrumentality of harm o The harm that occurred would not ordinarily occur in the absence of negligence Defenses to negligence o The plaintiff was in no way responsible for his own injury o Contributory negligence the plaintiff s failure to exercise reasonable care for her own safety o Assumption of risk plaintiff s voluntary consent to a known danger o Comparative negligence courts seek to determine the relative negligence of the parties and award damages in proportion to the degrees of negligence determined plaintiff s recovery defendant s percentage share of the negligence causing the injury plaintiff s proven damages o Comparative fault technically involves all kinds of fault but is used interchangeably with comparative negligence Strict Liability Strict liability is liability without fault or irrespective of fault defendant is liable even though he did not intend to cause the harm and did not bring it about through recklessness or negligence o Abnormally dangerous activities are those necessarily involving a risk of harm that cannot be eliminated by the exercise of reasonable care Insurance crisis could be due to greater imposition of strict liability increases in the frequency and size of punitive damage awards similar increases in awards for noneconomic harms such as pain and suffering Tort reform judgment o Limiting defendants tort liability plaintiff s ability to obtain a o Limiting the damages plaintiffs can recover once they get a judgment 3 Hresil and niece were shopping at a Sears few shoppers in the store spent 10 min in the women s department with no other shoppers neice completed a purchase in another part of the store and went towards the women s department to meet up with her aunt Hresil lost her balance and struggled to avoid a fall hitting her right leg on the shopping cart leg swelled Hresil saw a gob on the floor where she slipped Sears employee said it looked like someone spit on the floor o Reasonable person standard Sears breached a duty 4 Michael Delgado and Linette Delgado arrived at Trax Bar Grill between 10 and 1030pm on a Sat night bar patron and 3 friends stared at Delgado multiple times while they were there Delgado became uncomfortable so he considered leaving the bar Nichlols Trax security guard said that Linette expressed concern that there was going to be a fight Nichols observed hostile stares between Delgado and Joseph friends Nichols asked the Delgado s to leave to avoid a fight Delgados went to their car in the Trax parking lot another Trax bouncer who used to be posted outside of the bar was not longer present 12 to 20 men who were in the parking lot Joseph and his friend followed Delgado s out of Trax all these guys beat up Mr Delgado Delgado suffered fractured skull and subdural hematoma hospitalized for 16 days personality changes headaches sued Trax for negligence and Joseph for battery court agreed with Delgado Trax appealed Appeal court said there was no evidence of prior parking lot incidences so foreseeability was lacking said there was no obligation to furnish an outside security guard


View Full Document

UMD BMGT 380 - Chapter 7: Negligence and Strict Liability

Documents in this Course
Chapter 1

Chapter 1

16 pages

Exam 1

Exam 1

16 pages

Chapter 6

Chapter 6

10 pages

Chapter 6

Chapter 6

42 pages

Chapter 6

Chapter 6

42 pages

Exam

Exam

9 pages

Exam 2

Exam 2

14 pages

Notes

Notes

2 pages

Exam 1

Exam 1

4 pages

Exam 3

Exam 3

16 pages

Chapter 1

Chapter 1

10 pages

Exam 1

Exam 1

6 pages

Notes

Notes

23 pages

Exam 1

Exam 1

7 pages

Essay

Essay

2 pages

Load more
Download Chapter 7: Negligence and Strict Liability
Our administrator received your request to download this document. We will send you the file to your email shortly.
Loading Unlocking...
Login

Join to view Chapter 7: Negligence and Strict Liability and access 3M+ class-specific study document.

or
We will never post anything without your permission.
Don't have an account?
Sign Up

Join to view Chapter 7: Negligence and Strict Liability and access 3M+ class-specific study document.

or

By creating an account you agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms Of Use

Already a member?