> ## Documentation Index > Fetch the complete documentation index at: https://lawmaxxing.com/llms.txt > Use this file to discover all available pages before exploring further. # Torts (Negligence - Breach of Duty) > Session 7 ## I. The General Standard of Care (Breach) ### 1. Black Letter Law / Rule * **Prima Facie Element:** To prove negligence, the plaintiff must show **Breach**, which is defined as **conduct falling below the standard of care of a reasonable, prudent person under the circumstances**. * This mantra must be applied specifically to the facts (e.g., "reasonable prudent driver," "reasonable prudent doctor") \[cite: 128-130]. * Fluidity in stating this rule is essential for bar exam success \[cite: 179-181]. ### 2. Key Cases * **Davison v. Snohomish County** * **Facts:** Plaintiffs were injured when their car broke through a wooden guardrail on a bridge. The county had not built the rail strong enough to withstand the impact. * **Holding/Rule:** The court found no negligence as a matter of law. Building guardrails strong enough to stop cars at high speeds creates a prohibitive cost burden relative to the risk \[cite: 143-145]. The construction did not fall below the standard of care under the circumstances (financial feasibility is a circumstance). ### 3. Nuance & Policy * **JNOV (Judgment Notwithstanding the Verdict):** A motion asking the judge to overrule the jury's verdict because, as a matter of law, the winning party failed to prove their case. It is a high threshold \[cite: 161-163]. *** ## II. The Learned Hand Formula (Calculus of Risk) ### 1. Black Letter Law / Rule * Determination of whether conduct is reasonable is done by balancing risks against the cost of prevention. This is known as the **Learned Hand Formula**. * **The Formula:** $B < P \times L$ * **P:** The **Probability** that the risk of harm will manifest (accident occurring). * **L:** The **Gravity of Harm** (damages) that results if the accident occurs. * **B:** The **Burden/Cost** of adequate precautions (remedial measures) to prevent the harm. * **Application:** If the Cost of Precautions ($B$) is **less than** the Probability multiplied by the Gravity of Harm ($P \times L$), the failure to take that precaution is a **Breach** \[cite: 315, 319-320]. ### 2. Key Cases * **United States v. Carroll Towing Co.** * **Facts:** A barge broke loose; the question was whether the bargee (attendant) should have been on board. * **Holding/Rule:** Judge Learned Hand introduced the balancing test to determine negligence. ### 3. Hypotheticals & Examples * **The Jet Ski/Snowmobile Example:** * **Scenario:** A "dead man's switch" (safety feature that stops the engine if the rider falls off) costs $500 ($B$). The probability of a rider falling and the vehicle hitting someone is 1% ($P$). The average damage caused by a runaway vehicle is $100,000 ($L$) \[cite: 217, 223, 227-229]. * **Calculation:** $P \times L$ = $1,000 (1% of 100k). $B$=$500. * **Outcome:** Since $500 < 1,000$, the failure to install the switch is a breach of duty. * **Disposable Lighter:** * **Scenario:** A safety latch costs 5 cents. The risk of a lighter igniting in a pocket is 1%, causing \$10,000 in car fire damages. * **Outcome:** 5 cents \< $100 ($10k \times 1%). Failure to install is a breach \[cite: 331-335]. ### 4. Nuance & Policy * This formula is primarily used in cases with an **economic aspect**, such as **product liability** (design defects), rather than everyday negligence like driving too fast or leaving a golf club out. *** ## III. The Objective Standard & Physical/Mental Characteristics ### 1. Black Letter Law / Rule * **Objective Standard:** Tort law uses an objective standard. We compare the defendant's conduct to a "reasonable, prudent person," not to what the defendant *thought* was reasonable (Subjective Standard) \[cite: 401-404, 412]. * **Physical Characteristics:** The physical characteristics of the defendant (e.g., blindness, physical disability) **ARE** taken into account. The standard becomes "a reasonable person with the same physical disability under the circumstances". * **Mental Illness:** Mental illness is **NOT** taken into account. A mentally ill person is held to the standard of a reasonable person *without* mental illness. * *Exception:* If a person is adjudicated insane (judicially determined), they may be institutionalized, but generally, for civil liability, mental illness is no defense. ### 2. Key Cases * **Vaughan v. Menlove** (1837) * **Facts:** Defendant stacked hay in a way that caused it to ignite and burn neighbor's cottages. Defendant argued he acted in "good faith" and did his best given his limited intelligence. * **Holding/Rule:** The court rejected the "good faith" argument. The standard is objective: what a reasonable, prudent farmer would have done, not what the specific defendant believed was right. * **Delair v. McAdoo** * **Facts:** Defendant drove on tires so worn the fabric was showing and caused a blowout/accident. Defendant claimed he didn't know the tires were dangerous. * **Holding/Rule:** Drivers are charged with **constructive knowledge**. A driver is deemed to know what a reasonable person would know (that bald tires are dangerous), regardless of actual knowledge. * **Roberts v. State of Louisiana** * **Facts:** A blind man bumped into the plaintiff at a concession stand. He was not using his cane at that specific moment \[cite: 541-543]. * **Holding/Rule:** A disabled person is not held to the standard of a sighting person, but to the standard of a **reasonable blind person** under the circumstances. * **Breunig v. American Family Insurance Co.** * **Facts:** Driver believed she could fly (Batman delusion) and drove into a truck. * **Holding/Rule:** Mental illness is not an exception. She was held to the objective reasonable person standard. ### 3. Nuance & Policy * **Public Safety Policy:** We do not allow mental illness as a defense because innocent victims need compensation, and it incentivizes guardians to care for the mentally ill \[cite: 650-652]. *** ## IV. The Emergency Doctrine ### 1. Black Letter Law / Rule * If a defendant is confronted with a sudden emergency (not of their own making), their conduct is compared to a **reasonable, prudent person under those specific emergency circumstances**. * Conduct that might be negligent ordinarily (e.g., jumping out of a moving car) may be reasonable under life-threatening circumstances. ### 2. Key Cases * **Cordas v. Peerless Transportation Co.** * **Facts:** A taxi driver had a gun pointed at him by a thief. He jumped out of the moving cab to escape; the unmanned cab hit pedestrians \[cite: 501-503]. * **Holding/Rule:** The driver was **not liable**. Under the circumstances (gun pointed at head), his conduct did not fall below the standard of care. *** ## V. Minors ### 1. Black Letter Law / Rule * **General Rule:** A minor is compared to a **reasonable minor of like age, intelligence, and experience** under the circumstances. * **Exception (Adult Activity):** If the minor is engaged in an **adult activity** (e.g., driving a car, operating a motor vehicle), they are held to the standard of a **reasonable, prudent adult**. ### 2. Key Cases * **Robinson v. Lindsay** * **Facts:** A 13-year-old was driving a snowmobile and severed the plaintiff's thumb \[cite: 577-579]. * **Holding/Rule:** Because operating a snowmobile is an adult activity, the minor is held to the adult standard of care. ### 3. Hypotheticals & Examples * **Frisbee vs. Driving:** If a 13-year-old throws a frisbee and hits someone, use the "like age/experience" standard. If they are driving a car or hunting, use the "reasonable adult" standard \[cite: 610-611]. *** ## VI. Custom and Usage ### 1. Black Letter Law / Rule * **Rule:** Evidence of industry custom or practice is **admissible** as evidence of what a reasonable person would do, but it is **not conclusive** \[cite: 851-852, 882]. * A jury can find that an entire industry's custom is negligent if it lags behind reasonable safety standards. ### 2. Key Cases * **Trimarco v. Klein** * **Facts:** Plaintiff was injured when a glass shower door shattered. Plaintiff argued the custom was to use safety glass; landlord argued custom was only to replace broken glass with safety glass, not retrofit existing ones \[cite: 826-830]. * **Holding/Rule:** Custom is relevant evidence but not dispositive. A landlord (or industry) cannot shield themselves solely by saying "everyone else does it this way" if the practice itself is unsafe. ### 3. Hypotheticals & Examples * **Auto Industry:** In the 1950s, no manufacturers installed seatbelts. If a manufacturer was sued, they couldn't simply argue "nobody else does it" as a complete defense if the technology was available and reasonable \[cite: 866-871]. *** ## VII. Professionals (Malpractice) ### 1. Black Letter Law / Rule * **Standard of Care:** A professional is held to the standard of an **ordinary member of the profession** in good standing under the circumstances. * **No "Novice" Defense:** The standard is objective. It does not adjust for lack of experience. A brand new lawyer/doctor is held to the same standard as a reasonable, prudent lawyer/doctor. * **Specialists:** If a professional is **Board Certified** or a specialist, they are held to the higher standard of a reasonable **specialist** in that field. * **Expert Testimony:** Because professional standards are often beyond the knowledge of lay jurors, **expert testimony** is generally required to establish the standard of care and breach. ### 2. Key Cases * **Heath v. Swift Wings, Inc.** * **Facts:** A pilot crashed. The trial court instructed the jury to consider the pilot's specific training and experience. * **Holding/Rule:** Incorrect instruction. The standard is a reasonable, prudent pilot, not a pilot with *this defendant's* specific experience. Experience is not a defense. * **Hodges v. Carter** * **Facts:** Lawyers served process by mail (customary practice) rather than personal service (statutory requirement), leading to dismissal of the client's case \[cite: 1088-1090]. * **Holding/Rule:** Professionals are not liable for mere errors in judgment if they acted in accordance with professional custom. Since the lawyers followed the accepted custom, they were not liable. * **Boyce v. Brown** * **Facts:** Doctor used a metal screw for a fracture. Years later, he treated pain with tape/support but did not X-ray. Another doctor later X-rayed and found necrosis \[cite: 1114-1123]. * **Holding/Rule:** To prove malpractice, the plaintiff needs expert testimony stating the defendant *breached* the standard. The second doctor would not testify that the standard *required* an X-ray at that time (1936), only that *he* would have done it. Personal opinion is not the standard of care. ### 3. Nuance & Policy * **Licensed Activity Only:** The professional standard only applies when the actor is engaged in their profession. A cardiologist driving a car is held to the standard of a reasonable driver, not a reasonable cardiologist \[cite: 975-979]. *** ## VIII. Informed Consent ### 1. Black Letter Law / Rule * **Traditional Rule (Physician-Focused):** Did the doctor disclose what a reasonable *doctor* would disclose?. * **Modern Rule (Patient-Focused):** The standard is **what a reasonable patient would want to know** regarding the material risks and consequences before consenting to treatment. ### 2. Key Cases * **Scott v. Bradford** (Oklahoma Case) * **Facts:** Plaintiff had a hysterectomy causing incontinence. She claimed she wasn't told of the risks/alternatives. * **Holding/Rule:** Adopted the patient-focused standard. It is irrelevant what the doctor thought was appropriate to tell; the focus is on the patient's right to know material risks to make an informed decision \[cite: 1247-1248]. *** ## IX. Defenses to Intentional Torts (Review) ### 1. Public vs. Private Necessity * **Public Necessity:** Where an act is for the **public good** (e.g., destroying a building to stop a fire spreading to the city). The defense is **absolute**, and the actor does not have to pay for damages \[cite: 1270-1271]. * **Private Necessity:** Where a defendant acts to save their own interest/property (e.g., tying a ship to a dock during a storm). The actor is relieved of the technical tort of trespass but **must pay for actual damages** caused.