This article is a continuation of the article ?Was The Person Who Injured Me Negligent??
The next issue after you determine whether the other party is at fault, is whether the conduct?caused your injury or property loss. ?Traditionally, there are two types of causation ?but for? causation, and proximate causation. ?This means that the injury causing conduct can?t just be a force that sets matters in motion, it needs to be closely linked to the actual harm caused; simply put, just because an action is a ?but for? cause, does not mean it is the proximate cause of the harm.
One of the most notorious cases dealing with the issue of proximate cause is the case?Palsgraf v. Long Island Railroad Co., 248 N.Y. 339, 162 N.E.?99 (N.Y. 1928):
In Palsgraf, a passenger?carrying a package, while hurrying to catch and board a moving Long Island Rail Road train, appeared to two of the railroad?s?employees to be falling. ?The employees were guards, one of whom was located on the car, the other of whom was located on the platform. ?The guard on the car attempted to pull the passenger into the car and the guard on the platform attempted to push him into the car from behind. The guards? efforts to aid the passenger caused the package the passenger was holding to fall on the rails. ?Unbeknownst to the guards, the package, which was approximately 15?inches long and wrapped in newspaper, contained fireworks, and the package exploded when it hit the rails. ?The shock reportedly knocked down scales at the other end of the platform?(although later accounts suggest that a panicking bystander may have upset the scale), which injured Mrs. Helen Palsgraf (the Plaintiff). ?Palsgraf sued the railroad, claiming her injury resulted from negligent?acts of the employee. ?The trial court and the intermediate appeals court found for Palsgraf (Plaintiff) by verdict from a jury, and Long Island Rail Road appealed the judgment.
The Court found that the relationship of the guard?s action to Palsgraf?s injury was too indirect to make him liable. ?This concept of?foreseeability?in tort law tends to limit liability to the consequences of an act that could reasonably be foreseen rather than every single consequence that follows.
Then how is causation proven? ?The best way is through an expert,?the type of which naturally depends on the incident. ?Causation is very important to determining whether you have a case against a third party and?requires the advice of an experienced attorney.
If you are injured it is important that you discuss your matter with an attorney who can help you assess the facts of your case; you should contact the Catalano Law Group today to consult with us to determine what your options are, and so that you can obtain full compensation for your injuries.
This article is not meant to be all inclusive or a substitute for legal advice from a licensed attorney in your own jurisdiction.? If you are involved in a legal matter and have questions, you should contact a competent attorney in your own jurisdiction. ?Jannik Catalano is licensed in California. The information provided is based upon California law only. If you are looking for information for another jurisdiction, please contact an attorney in that area.?The Catalano Law Group?handles personal injury, business litigation, real estate litigation and insurance bad faith matters.
This post is not meant to be legal advice or create an attorney-client relationship with the Catalano Law Group. If you are interested in retaining counsel, we are happy to set a consultation. Consultations can be scheduled by calling 415-436-9236.? View a full listing of?The Catalano Law Group Areas of Practice.
Source: http://catalanolawgroup.com/2012/10/13/the-person-who-injured-me-was-negligent-now-what/
9-11 Chris Brown Tattoo Innocence of Muslims Clara Schumann Jael Strauss Alison Pill Sam Bacile
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.