Negligence Case Summary

Under California law, the first aspect that must be established in a negligence case is the existence of duty. The existence of duty depends on “foreseeability of risk.” If there is a foreseeable risk, then it becomes the duty of an individual to adhere to solving it. If the individual fails to resolve the issue, and someone is harmed, that individual could then held liable for the incident. (6 Witkin, Summary of Cal. Law (10th ed. 2005) Torts, § 835, p. 52.) A person cannot hold another liable if he or she injures themselves or another if they are “actively careless.” It is expected if a person does not use “ordinary care” while involving themselves in an activity they should anticipate the possibility of future harm. Another form of duty of care is known as an “affirmative duty.” A person can be held liable for failure “to act affirmatively” to remove potential risk. The overall duty of care placed on an individual includes not putting others at risk by allowing them to be exposed to a potentially dangerous situation. …show more content…
State of California (1983) 34 Cal.3d 18, 23, 192 Cal.Rptr. 233, 664 P.2d 137.) Essentially, no person has the duty to come to the aid of another person unless a “close relationship” exists between them, therefore he/she cannot be held reliable for failing to protect another. In the case of Dillon v. Legg (1968) 68 C.2d 728, 741, 69 C.R. 72, 441 P.2d 912, supra, §1008, is “[w]hether plaintiff and the victim were closely related, as contrasted with an absence of any relationship or the presence of only a distant relationship.” This guideline most often requires a close family relationship (for example: wife; husband or child), regardless of any alleged emotional