Document Sample
Negligence Powered By Docstoc
   19.1 – 19.8 – read Chapter 19
   Negligence: a tort, is a civil wrong consisting of
    five criteria:
       Duty or reasonable standard of care (as decided by
        judge as a matter of law),
       Breach (or "negligence" in laymen's terms, decided as
        a matter of fact),
       Injury (the fact that the plaintiff suffered an injury,
        and is determined at a matter of fact),
       Cause in Fact or conduct of defendant that causes
        plaintiff's injury(s)(decided as a matter of fact),
       Legal Cause (now perceived as the foreseeability of
        the type of injury caused but not the specific injury or
        extent of injury, determined as a matter of fact).
   Matters of law are decided by a judge, matters
    of fact are decided by a jury.
   In order to prove negligence, it is not necessary to prove
    harm, but in order for a cause of action to rest in tort,
    harm must be proven
   In order for the harm to be compensable in a negligence
    lawsuit, the defendant must be shown to have been
    negligent, and it must be demonstrated that his
    negligence was the proximate cause of the harm
    sustained by the plaintiff.
   Damages are awarded in proportion to the scope of the
    harm done
   The courts also consider the idea if a “reasonable
    person” would commit or dismiss the act
   When considering a negligence cause of action
    there are six primary elements which need to be
    viewed and covered thoroughly:
       (1) duty,
       (2) breach of duty,
       (3) causation,
       4) damage,
       (5) remoteness and
       (6) defences.
   Once this has been done an appropriate award
    of damages may be considered
                 Coase theorem
   the Coase theorem, attributed to Ronald Coase, relates
    to the economic efficiency of a government's allocation
    of property rights
   B < PL
   where B is the cost (burden) of taking precautions, and
    P is the probability of loss (L).
   rather than spending money on safety, the individual will
    simply allow harm to occur and pay for the costs of that
    harm, because that will be more cost-efficient than
    taking precautions
   leads to an optimal allocation of resources; where harm
    can be cheaply avoided, the legal system requires
    precautions. Where precautions are prohibitively
    expensive, it does not
   In many states, damages in negligence lawsuits
    can include (but are not limited to)
    compensation for:
       the injury suffered
       damaged or destroyed personal property
       medical and hospital bills
       harm to marital relations (called "loss of consortium")
       lost past and future earnings
       and physical and emotional "pain and suffering"
                Defenses to suits
   Contributory negligence: cannot recover
    remedies for your own negligence
   Comparative negligence: dividing the damages
    in accordance to the degree in which each was
    at fault
       Scenario: Business Law question
       P sues D in negligence. At trial, it is determined that
        P's negligence was 40% responsible for P's injury,
        and D's negligence was 60% responsible. P's losses
        total $10,000. Under a pure comparative negligence
        system, P will recover:
        a) Nothing.     b) $4000.     c) $6000.       d) $10,00
   Assumption of Risk: voluntary encountering a
    known danger
   19.9 - collected

Shared By: