Explain the two types of causation
What will be an ideal response?
A person who commits a negligent act is not liable unless this act was the cause of the plaintiff's injuries. Court have divided causation into two categories—causation in fact and proximate causation—and require each to be shown before the plaintiff may recover damages. Causation in fact means that the defendant's negligence must be the actual cause of the plaintiff's injuries. For example, suppose a corporation negligently pollutes the plaintiff's drinking water. The plaintiff dies of a heart attack unrelated to the polluted water. Although the corporation has acted negligently, it is not liable for the plaintiff's death. There was no cause-and-effect relationship between them. Another phrase for causation in fact is "but for" causation, which means "but for the defendant's conduct, the plaintiff would not have suffered harm.". Proximate cause is that which makes the defendant liable. Proximate cause is a legal judgment call that concerns the magic word of foreseeability. Based on public policy, the law establishes a point along the damage chain after which the negligent party is no longer responsible for the consequences of his or her actions. Beyond that point, there is no proximate cause. Proximate cause is examined on a case-by-case basis, and can be trumped by superseding causes.
You might also like to view...
At common law, an illegitimate child was the child of nobody.
Answer the following statement true (T) or false (F)
What does the Ninth Amendment protect?
What will be an ideal response?
A violation of the Automatic Stay must be proven by the ________
Fill in the blank(s) with correct word
A law that bans "indecent" communications on the Internet, without a more precise definition, and not a readily and commonly understood term, would be considered a violation of the First Amendment under the overbreadth doctrine
Indicate whether the statement is true or false