Standard of Care
If you have one of these, you are held to the Reasonable Person Standard but expected to use a higher amount of care.
What are special skills, knowledge, experience, and training?
A duty is breached when one or more of these three special duty rules occur.
What are (1) a failure to act, (2) instrumentalities or conduct, and (3) an assumption of duty?
What is Alternative Causation?
An invitee is owed this level of care in most instances.
What is reasonable care?
What are (1) a foreseeable plaintiff's ability to recover in the foreseeable zone of danger and (2) plaintiff's recovery of an injury proximately caused by the defendant?
This exception would have a child actor held to an adult standard of care despite his or her age.
What is the adult activity exception?
The Zone of Danger test requires the plaintiff to suffer this type of emotional distress.
What is serious?
A proximate cause must cause the specific injury that actually occurred in both of these ways.
What are foreseeably and substantially?
Nick must (1) know of Danny's presence, (2) know of the acid leak, and (3) know that Danny plans on showering (or will encounter the danger).
A judge's idea of foreseeability of and within the zone of danger and a jury's idea of foreseeable and substanital injury comes from this case.
What is McCain?
What is a professional and what is good and customary?
These three elements make up the Wigmore Test.
What are (1) the accident must be of a kind that ordinarily does not occur without someone's negligence, (2) it must be caused by an agency or instrumentality within the exclusive control of the defendant, and (3) it must not have been due to any voluntary action or contribution on the part of the plaintiff?
Negligent acts of third-parties, crimes and intentional torts of third-parties, and acts of non-human origin are all intervening causes that do this.
What is "may break the casual link?"
An invitee must be present within this period, but the landowner must also account for these.
What is the scope of invitation and what are foreseeable deviations?
This case used dealt with attractive nuisances, but its holding indicated that the children were not "lured" onto the premises.
What is United Zinc?
This case helps define foreseeability and includes a little boy being struck by a baseball.
What is Pitre?
In some jurisdictions, these three factors are considered if there was a duty owed to a bystander.
What are (1) whether the plaintiff was located near the accident, (2) whether the plaintiff suffered direct emotional impact upon his or her sensory and contemporaneous observance of the accident, and (3) whether the plaintiff and the victim are closely related [the Dillon factors]?
These three intervening causes do successfully break the causal link.
What are fires, alcohol, and suicide?
A child of this status was lured onto the premises and was injured by this.
What are tender years and what lured them onto the property?
The rule "one who takes part in such a sport accepts the dangers that are inherent so far as they are obvious and necessary" comes from this case.
What is Murphy?
These five excuses are found in section 288a of the 2nd Restatements of Torts.
What are... (1) the defendant's incapacity, (2) does not know or have reason not to know of his or her noncompliance, (3) unable to comply after reasonable diligence, (4) emergency (not of the actor's creation, & (5) greater risk to self or others if complying
A duty is likely breached when one of these seven special relationships fail to act.
What are (1) common carrier and passengers, (2) innkeeper and guests, (3) employer and employees, (4) landlord and tenant, (5) school and student, (6) business and lawful invitees, (7) custodian and those in custody.
These two elements are required to establish assumption of risk.
What are (1) knowledge and (2) volition?
These five elements make the Child Trespasser Doctrine.
What are (1) the place where the condition exists is upon what that the possessor knows or has reason to know that children are likely to trespass, (2) the condition is one of which the possessor knows or has reason to know and which he realizes or should realize will involve an unreasonable risk of death or serious bodily harm to children, (3) the children because of their youth do not discover the condition or realize the risk involved, (4) the utility to the possessor and the burden of maintaining the condition is slight as compared to the risk to children involved, and (5) the possessor fails to exercise reasonable care to eliminate the danger or protect the children?
Based on logic, practical experience, and fundamental justice, this case attempted to rid the Californian justice system of the contributory negligence defense.
What is Li v. Yellow Taxi Cab?