Sign up to save your podcasts
Or
Share Torts - Negligence Part 4 - Causation and Proximate Cause
Share to email
Share to Facebook
Share to X
Share to email
Share to Facebook
Share to X
Or
Torts - Negligence Part 4 - Causation and Proximate Cause
Get ready to master the vital connections in any negligence claim with "Study for the Bar in Your Car"! In Episode 15: Causation and Proximate Cause, your AI hosts, Ma and Claude, drawing from Angela's comprehensive notes, guide you through the intricate final elements of negligence: causation and damages. It's not enough to show carelessness; you must prove that negligence actually caused the harm and that the defendant should be legally responsible for it.
This episode clarifies the crucial distinction between:
- Actual Cause (Cause in Fact): The purely factual link asking, "Would the injury have occurred but for the defendant's negligent act?". You'll learn how the "but for" test functions and when the substantial factor test is used for multiple contributing causes. It even touches on rare "unascertainable cause" situations where the burden of proof shifts.
- Proximate Cause (Legal Cause): This is the "legal brake pedal", limiting liability to foreseeable harms. You'll explore how intervening forces (like medical malpractice or rescue attempts) are handled, and when an unforeseeable superseding cause (like an intentional criminal act) can break the chain of liability.
A key takeaway is the eggshell plaintiff rule: the defendant "takes the plaintiff as they find them". If the type of harm is foreseeable, the defendant is liable for the full extent of the injury, even if the plaintiff's unique vulnerability made the harm far worse than expected. This determination is generally a question of fact for the jury.
For bar exam success, the episode offers a crucial strategy: assume proximate cause is satisfied unless the facts explicitly describe a clearly bizarre, criminal, or extraordinary intervening event. Remember, while statutory violations (negligence per se) establish duty and breach, you still need to prove causation and proximate cause separately.
This episode offers precise, practical insights essential for your bar exam success. Subscribe to the "Study for the Bar in Your Car" podcast today and build a robust understanding of tort law's most challenging concepts!.
View all episodes
By Angela Rutledge, LLM, LLBGet ready to master the vital connections in any negligence claim with "Study for the Bar in Your Car"! In Episode 15: Causation and Proximate Cause, your AI hosts, Ma and Claude, drawing from Angela's comprehensive notes, guide you through the intricate final elements of negligence: causation and damages. It's not enough to show carelessness; you must prove that negligence actually caused the harm and that the defendant should be legally responsible for it.
This episode clarifies the crucial distinction between:
- Actual Cause (Cause in Fact): The purely factual link asking, "Would the injury have occurred but for the defendant's negligent act?". You'll learn how the "but for" test functions and when the substantial factor test is used for multiple contributing causes. It even touches on rare "unascertainable cause" situations where the burden of proof shifts.
- Proximate Cause (Legal Cause): This is the "legal brake pedal", limiting liability to foreseeable harms. You'll explore how intervening forces (like medical malpractice or rescue attempts) are handled, and when an unforeseeable superseding cause (like an intentional criminal act) can break the chain of liability.
A key takeaway is the eggshell plaintiff rule: the defendant "takes the plaintiff as they find them". If the type of harm is foreseeable, the defendant is liable for the full extent of the injury, even if the plaintiff's unique vulnerability made the harm far worse than expected. This determination is generally a question of fact for the jury.
For bar exam success, the episode offers a crucial strategy: assume proximate cause is satisfied unless the facts explicitly describe a clearly bizarre, criminal, or extraordinary intervening event. Remember, while statutory violations (negligence per se) establish duty and breach, you still need to prove causation and proximate cause separately.
This episode offers precise, practical insights essential for your bar exam success. Subscribe to the "Study for the Bar in Your Car" podcast today and build a robust understanding of tort law's most challenging concepts!.