How does the substantial factor test differ from the but-for test?
What will be an ideal response?
Concurrent causes are those events that combine (concur) to cause the plaintiff's harm, although either one of them alone could cause the harm without any contribution from the other. Under the substantial-factor test, an alternative to the but-for test, the question is whether the defendant was a substantial factor in producing the plaintiff's injury. If the concurrent causes produce a single, indivisible harm in which the damage from one event cannot be separated from that caused by the other, the courts have generally found both events to be a substantial factor in producing the plaintiff's injuries.
You might also like to view...
How does the Red Flag Rule under FACTA help prevent identity theft?
What will be an ideal response?
Examination of a trademark application is a highly predictable stage of of the trademark application process.
Answer the following statement true (T) or false (F)
Which is an example of probate property??
A. ?Annuity contracts with a named beneficiary B. ?Property owned in tenancy C. ?Money placed in a bank account as a Totten trust D. ?Gain from the sale of a business
The state statute that specifies what types of contracts must be in writing (or be evidenced by a written document) is commonly referred to as the
A. Statute of Frauds. B. Statute of Writing. C. Statute of Contracts. D. Statute of Forms.