This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website. Learn more

Law Outlines Tort Law Outlines

Nonliability For Foreseeable Consequences Outline

Updated Nonliability For Foreseeable Consequences Notes

Tort Law Outlines

Tort Law

Approximately 34 pages

I handwrote my notes for the entire class and then used the notes to create this outline in preparation for the Final Exam. ...

The following is a more accessible plain text extract of the PDF sample above, taken from our Tort Law Outlines. Due to the challenges of extracting text from PDFs, it will have odd formatting:

Nonliability for Foreseeable Consequences (Limited Duty Rules)

  1. Limitations on the Duty to Rescue

There is no legal duty to rescue

Duty may arise in special circumstances:

§42. Duty Based on Undertaking

An actor who undertakes to render services to another that the actor knows or should know reduce the risk of physical harm to the other has a duty of reasonable care to the other in conducting the undertaking if:

  1. The failure to exercise such care increases the risk of harm beyond that which existed w/o the undertaking, or

  2. The person to whom the services are rendered or another relies on the actor’s exercising reasonable care in undertaking.

Basically you have a duty to act with due care ONCE you have Undertaken Rescue Operations.

§314A Special Relations Giving Rise to Duty to Aid or Protect: (even from natural causes)

  1. A common carrier, Inn Keeper, Possessor of Land Open to Public, One required by law to take custody of the other, is under a duty to its passengers to take reasonable action:

  1. To protect them against unreasonable risk of physical harm, and

  2. To give them 1st Aid after it know or has reason to know that they are injured or ill, and to care for them till they can be cared for by others (Call 911)

Some Courts have enacted statutes such as Child Abuse reporting, or rendering help in car accident statutes for rescue duty.

“Good Samaritan” statutes give immunity to those rendering gratuitous assistance in an emergency. Some only pertain to medical workers and emergency responders. Some to all people from negligence coming for their help.

  1. Limitations on Recovery for Pure Economic Loss

Majority position is that plaintiffs may not recover for pure economic losses in tort (extend liability to much).

Exceptions:

Fisherman’s Exception

If have even small amount of physical damage then can recover for those and economic losses (lost wages, med bills, profit loss).

  1. Limitations on Recovery for Emotional Distress

Many courts looks skeptically at claims that negligence cause no physical harm but only became fearful or emotionally distresses. (Limitless liability concern).

  1. The Impact Rule (Mitchell v. Rochester Ry, miscarriage from fright)

Need impact w/fright or distress to recover, w/o no recovery even for later physical manifestations like blindness or insanity.

Question of impact or not often question for jury (condom in salad?)

  1. Zone-of-Danger Rule and Exceptions

Plaintiff who: is in danger of physical impact

Reasonably fears for her own safety and,

Suffers serious emotional distress because of that fear can recover

It is not necessary to suffer impact, only that he be aware that defendant...

Buy the full version of these notes or essay plans and more in our Tort Law Outlines.