
The defendant was not in a position to have a duty of care toward the plaintiff and is not responsible for the harm. One defense to a breach of duty claim is that no duty existed. Simply owning the animal establishes their liability. If someone owns a tiger and it escapes and hurts someone, it won’t matter if the owner was negligent. One of the most common types of strict liability cases is one involving keeping extremely dangerous animals. If the injury occurred and was caused by the product, animal or activity, then the defendant is liable.Įxamples of a Breach of Duty of Care in a Strict Liability Case In a strict liability case there is no reasonable person standard or any inquiry into what the defendant knew. Abnormally dangerous activities: The defendant took part in activities known to be dangerous, such as storing dynamite in their garage.Dangerous animals: A defendant owned or was responsible for a dangerous animal that cause harm to the plaintiff.

Product liability: Where a plaintiff is harmed by a defective product made by the defendant.Strict liability cases fall into three categories: Strict liability is the breach of an absolute duty to make something safe. Negligence cases include personal injury, medical malpractice, product liability and other types of civil cases, but there are other cases that can also involve a breach of duty: strict liability. So far, we’ve discussed negligence cases. The breach of duty caused harm to the plaintiff.The defendant owed a duty of care to someone.There are four elements of a negligence claim: Once a duty of care is established, if that duty was breached then a test is applied to determine if there was negligence. How closely connected the action and the harm are to one another.The cost and potential to choose an alternative to the action taken.Though states have different factors, most include: So, for example, it’s foreseeable that deciding to drive drunk will result in a car accident - the person who decided to drink and drive was negligent.Ī majority of states, however, rely on a multifactor analysis to determine whether a duty existed. What this means is that if a jury finds that if the harm was foreseeable then, the actor was negligent. In some states, foreseeability is the only test required to create a duty of care. When that is breached, negligence is the result. Remember, a duty of care is a legal obligation one person owes to another to exercise reasonable caution when doing something that could foreseeably cause harm. For example, states have regulations that explosives manufacturers must follow to protect the community. A state may have a law or regulation that specifies steps that must be taken by certain people or companies. Some states have statutes or rules that specifically lay out the steps that are required as part of a duty of care. The plaintiff and defendant have a business relationship, such as innkeeper and guest, or they have a voluntary relationship, such as a person who invites the public onto their property.īecause each state has its own laws concerning breach of duty and negligence, there are different standards and interpretations.Example: The defendant drove without their lights on so a pedestrian did not see them and was hit. The defendant knew or should have known that their actions would result in harm to the plaintiff.Example: A drunk volunteer firefighter drops the person they are carrying out of a burning building. The defendant volunteered to protect the plaintiff from harm.Example: A worker left a manhole cover off with no sign, causing the plaintiff to fall in the hole.


A doctor has a duty of care to meet the standard of care required by the patient’s condition. There are many situations in which people have a duty of care. The definition may seem simple enough, but in a negligence case, both “reasonable” and “foreseeable” can be important points of disagreement. In general, a duty of care is a legal obligation one person owes to another to exercise reasonable caution when doing something that could foreseeably cause harm.
