The majority decided that the conduct of the defendant guards is not liable because there is no direct wrongdoing to the plaintiffs. The majority’s opinion was aimed at discouraging fraudulent claims, but it would deny those who complain in good faith. I tend to agree with the dissent opinion penned by judge Andrew that due care is a duty that imposed to each of us to protect a society not only to protect some parties that have prior duty relationship. Despite there is no direct duty existed between the defendant and plaintiff, there needs to have a duty to the society. The Long Island Railroad Co. had a duty of care for Mrs. Palsgraf and any passengers not only in the car but also in its entire property protecting from harm. Even if the harms
