
	Where results make sense

Topic: Intervening cause

In the News (Thu 16 Feb 12)

EXECUTIVE POWER

Iran

ANALYSIS

Pakistan

Family compact

	Encyclopedia: Intervening cause (Site not responding. Last check: 2007-10-15)
		An independent intervening cause is an act of an independent person or entity that destroys the causal connection between the defendant’s act and the victim’s injury and thereby becomes the cause of the victim’s injury.
		One’s conduct is not a "proximate cause" of another’s injuries, however, if, in order to bring about such injuries, it was necessary that his or her conduct combine with or join with an "intervening cause" which also contributed to the cause of the injuries.
		The alleged intervening cause on which defendant relies was the victim’s act of backing out of her driveway into the residential street on which the accident occurred.
	www.nationmaster.com /encyclopedia/Intervening-cause (1611 words)

	Proximate cause - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
		In the law, a proximate cause is an event sufficiently related to a legally recognizable injury to be held the cause of that injury.
		An intervening cause has several requirements: it must 1) be independent of the original act, 2) be a voluntary human act or an abnormal natural event, and 3) occur in time between the original act and the harm.
		The doctrine of proximate cause is notoriously confusing.
	en.wikipedia.org /wiki/Proximate_cause (1113 words)

	Negligence - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
		When considering a negligence cause of action there are six primary elements which need to be viewed and covered thoroughly: (1) duty, (2) breach of duty, (3) causation, (4) damage, (5) remoteness and (6) defences.
		Actual cause asks the question of whether the person being sued, the defendant, was the actual cause of injuries sustained by the person initiating the lawsuit, the plaintiff.
		A simple example is where D's negligent driving caused P damage, but P's negligent driving also was a cause of that damage in part, in that, but for P's failure, his injuries would not have taken place or would not have been as severe as they in fact were.
	www.wikipedia.org /wiki/Negligence (1978 words)

	Intentional infliction of emotional distress - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
		A reckless disregard for the likelihood of causing emotional distress is sufficient.
		For example, where a defendant refused to inform a plaintiff of the whereabouts of her child for several years, though that defendant knew where the child was the entire time, the defendant could be held liable for IIED even though he had no intent to cause distress to the parent.
		An example of an act which might form the basis for a claim of intentional infliction of emotional distress would be sending a letter to an individual falsely informing the person that a close family member had been killed in an accident.
	www.wikipedia.org /wiki/Intentional_infliction_of_emotional_distress (475 words)

	Proximate cause - Law terms (Site not responding. Last check: 2007-10-15)
		That which, in a natural and continuous sequence, unbroken by an efficient intervening cause, produces the injury, and without which the result would not have occurred.
		A person generally is liable only if an injury was proximately caused by his/her action or by his/her failure to act when he/she had a duty to act.
		A person generally is liable only if an injury was proximately caused by his or her action or by his or her failure to act when he or she had a duty to act.
	www.encyclopedia-wiki.org /encyclopedias/lawglossary/Proximate-cause.html (169 words)

	Intervening Cause
		Intervening Cause comes between one act (or failure to act) which alters the natural and continuous series of events that follows.
		When an intervening cause is present, since the natural chain of events have been changed due to the subsequent act of another, the initial actor may be relieved of the responsibility for an injury that is produced.
		In the example provided for proximate cause, the act of the stranger picking up the ball and throwing it through the window is an intervening cause which relieves you from the responsibility for injury which may have occurred as a result of your act.
	ww2.kgw.com /Global/story.asp?S=428637 (158 words)

	Intervening Cause Law and Legal Definition - USlegalforms.com (Site not responding. Last check: 2007-10-15)
		Intervening cause is a defense that is raised by a defendant seeking relief from liability based upon the interruption of a link between the defendant's wrongful act claimed and the harm suffered by the plaintiff.
		When an intervening cause exists that breaks the natural chain of events due to the subsequent act of another, the initial wrongdoer may be relieved of the responsibility for an injury that occurs.
		An intervening cause is an independent, foreseeable cause that is occurs after another cause in time in producing the result but does not interrupt the chain of causation.
	www.uslegalforms.com /lawdigest/legaldefinitions.php/intervening_cause.htm (166 words)

	Intervening Cause -- resources
		Excerpt:...unless the latter is in itself sufficient to stand as the cause of the injury and the intervening cause must be such that the injury would not have been suffered except for the act, conduct, or...
		Excerpt:...that the illegal arrest is the cause of the subsequent confession, the presumption is rebuttable by a showing that the confession is the result of ''an intervening.
		Excerpt:...or the adjustment of grievances; (2) to cause or attempt to cause an employer to discriminate...
	bankruptcy.mongabay.com /resources/Intervening_Cause.html (1098 words)

	7.14 PROXIMATE CAUSE -- WHERE THERE IS A CLAIM OF INTERVENING OR SUPERSEDING CAUSES FOR JURY'S CONSIDERATION (Site not responding. Last check: 2007-10-15)
		An intervening cause is the act of an independent agency that destroys the causal connection between the defendant's [or other party's] negligence and the accident/incident/event or injury/loss/harm.
		To be an intervening cause the independent act must be the immediate and sole cause of the accident/incident/event or injury/loss/harm.
		You must determine whether the alleged intervening cause was an intervening cause that destroyed the substantial causal connection between the defendant's negligent actions (or omissions) and the accident/incident/event or injury/loss/harm.
	www.judiciary.state.nj.us /civil/charges/714.htm (344 words)

	Allison Law Firm - Workers' Compensation Cases - Accident (Site not responding. Last check: 2007-10-15)
		As the result of two workplace accidents that combined to cause death, a policeman's survivors were ruled to be entitled to worker's compensation benefits from the City of Shreveport and Kingwood, another employer, who employed the officer as a part-time security guard.
		In case any employee for who injury or death payments are due is at the time of the injury, employed and paid jointly by two or more employers subject to the provisions of this Chapter, such employers shall contribute to such payments in proportion to their several wage liabilities to the employer.
		The hearing officer concluded that the original injury was the viral infection, that it caused a cardiomyopathy, and that the resulting congestive heart failure is a complication of a compensable injury contracted during his employment.
	www.allisonlaw.com /dawn/accident.html (3015 words)

	7.11 PROXIMATE CAUSE -- ROUTINE TORT CASE WHERE NO ISSUES OF CONCURRENT OR INTERVENING CAUSES, OR FORESEEABILITY OF ... (Site not responding. Last check: 2007-10-15)
		This charge is designed to address proximate cause in the routine tort case when there is no issue as to concurrent or intervening causes or foreseeability.
		By proximate cause, I refer to a cause that in a natural and continuous sequence produces the accident/incident/event and resulting injury/loss/harm and without which the resulting accident/incident/event or injury/loss/harm(1) would not have occurred.(2) A person who is negligent is held responsible for
		If you find that the [name of defendant or other party]'s negligence was a cause of the accident/incident/event and that such negligence was a substantial factor in bringing about the injury/loss/harm, then you should find that [name of defendant or other party] was a proximate cause of the [name of plaintiff]'s injury/loss/harm.
	www.judiciary.state.nj.us /civil/charges/711.htm (327 words)

	SECOND INJURY FUND v. STEPHENS - Arkansas Personal Injury Lawyers
		A nonwork-related independent intervening cause does not require negligence or recklessness on the part of a claimant.
		Pointing to certain testimony and medical records from 1988 through 1996, and characterizing the 1996 injury and surgery as an independent intervening cause, it argues that the Commission erred in ignoring prior and subsequent factors that contributed to the disability.
		We, too, reject the argument that the statute required claimant to prove that his compensable 1995 injury was the major cause of his wage-loss disability.
	www.napil.com /PersonalInjuryCaseLawDetail31357/Page3.htm (556 words)

	SurfWax: News, Reviews and Articles On Intervening Cause
		The court found that because the "efficient moving cause" (builder's negligence) was covered, the loss or damage was covered, even though an intervening cause (earth movement) was expressly excluded, because the efficient moving cause set in motion the intervening cause.
		There would have to be a " force majeure" -- a serious intervening cause -- in the nature of a riot, a civil commotion, or a storm or an explosion, or an earthquake.
		The petition notes that the defendant's action was not a legal cause of death "if the actions of a third person or the occurrence of another event played an independent, important and overriding role in (bringing) about the death...
	www.lawkt.com /files/Intervening_Cause.html (320 words)

	1-99-2866
		The court further declared that "it's no issue of material fact that the intervening cause" of Alvarez' drunk driving "was independent." Accordingly, the court granted summary judgment and disposed of the cause.
		If a defendant's conduct "does nothing more than furnish a condition" and that condition causes injury only because of the subsequent independent act of a third party, the creation of that condition is not a proximate cause of the injury.
		It did not cause Alvarez' reckless driving, which was the sole subsequent independent act breaking the causal connection between the alleged defect in the median's height and Elfayer's death.
	www.state.il.us /court/Opinions/AppellateCourt/2001/1stDistrict/September/Html/1992866.htm (2876 words)

	No. 1-01-1195
		The board, on appeal, claims that Luchesi's failure to perform physical therapy constitutes an intervening cause breaking the causal connection between the shoulder injury and the disability.
		If the refusal had not been the sole cause of the continuing disability, the continuing disability would have arisen out of the accident as well as the refusal, and then, under the terms of the Act, the claimant would have a right to compensation, reduced or suspended due to the unreasonable refusal of medical care.
		Luchesi here presented evidence that the duty-related accident on March 30, 1998, is one cause of his disability, and the board heard no evidence that his subsequent refusal of physical therapy was the sole cause of his continuing disability.
	www.state.il.us /court/Opinions/AppellateCourt/2002/1stDistrict/August/Html/1011195.htm (5191 words)

	[No title]
		Thus, the "causal connection" between the wrong and damages is broken by the intervening cause.
		Sparks from the fire cause Petrol's truck to explode, sending the fire on the way to Rancher's barns and home, which burn down.
		Petrol's negligence is an intervening cause which gets Flameout off the liability hook.
	dictionary.law.com /definition.asp?selected=1010&bold=\|\|\|\| (187 words)

	Converted file ehf (Site not responding. Last check: 2007-10-15)
		An intervening cause is an action by a third-party or [sic] that breaks the causal connection between the Defendant’s alleged wrongful act and the Plaintiffs’ injury.
		A person who commits a tort against another for the purpose of causing a particular harm to the other is liable for such harm if it results, whether or not it is expectable, except where the harm results from an outside force the risk of which is not increased by the defendant’s act.
		The plaintiff may rebut such a prima facie case of probable cause by introducing evidence that shows the finding of probable cause was induced by false testimony, fraud, or other improper means such as the defendant withholding material facts at the hearing.
	www.ai.org /judiciary/opinions/archive/01280406.ehf.html (2523 words)

	Las Vegas Personal Injury Attorney - Las Vegas Personal Injury Lawyers - Personal Injury Lawyer In Las Vegas (Site not responding. Last check: 2007-10-15)
		The defendant's negligence must be established as a proximate cause of the plaintiff's injury.
		An "efficient intervening cause" is "not a concurrent and contributing cause but a superseding cause which is itself the natural and logical cause of the harm." Thomas v.
		As part of the prior risk, foreseeable intervening forces are within the scope of the prior negligence and do not negate liability.
	lasvegaslawyers.biz /nvatty4.html (880 words)

	Allison Law Firm - WC Case Study - Burden of Proof (Site not responding. Last check: 2007-10-15)
		The treating physician opined that the long delay between the accident and the seizures was caused by a buildup of scar tissue in the brain.
		Claimant contended that she contracted an occupational disease (myelodysplasia, which can take many years to manifest itself and can be caused by exposure to toxic chemicals) while employed by laundry for four months.
		Therefore, by proving the occurrence of an accident and a subsequent disability, and where there is no proven intervening cause, the presumption is raised that the work related accident caused the disability switching the burden to the defendant to prove the absence of causal connection between the accident and the injury.
	www.allisonlaw.com /dawn/burden.html (1964 words)

	liibulletin: Mason v. U.E.S.S. Leasing Corp.
		The Appellate Division did not err in reversing the lower court because opening the door without looking through the peephole was not an independent intervening cause by the Plaintiff as a matter of law.
		In the morning of July 11, 1992, Plaintiff opened the door to her apartment, without asking who was there or looking through the peephole, shortly after her live-in boyfriend called and told her he would be up to the apartment in five minutes.
		Furthermore, the Plaintiff's opening of her door without inquiry or looking through the peephole was not an independent intervening cause as a matter of law.
	www.law.cornell.edu /ny/ctap/comments/i01_0082.htm (405 words)

	Dictionary.com/cause
		A cause is an agent or condition that permits the occurrence of an effect or leads to a result: “He is not only dull in himself, but the cause of dullness in others” (Samuel Foote).
		Probable cause is an objective standard rather than a function of subjective opinion or suspicion not grounded in fact or circumstance.
		If the cause fails after the contract is made (as when a leased building cannot be occupied because of a fire), the contract may either be not enforced or only partially enforced.
	dictionary.reference.com /search?q=cause (1172 words)

	Hollis v. Dow Corning Corp. (Site not responding. Last check: 2007-10-15)
		Dow's failure to warn was a cause of her injury; whether Dr. Birch's actions in the hypothetical situation posited by Dow might also have been a cause is not a matter for Ms.
		He proceeded on the basis that there were four possible causes of the rupture: (i) an act or omission by Dr. Birch in inserting the implant; (ii) an act or omission by Dr. Quayle in removing the implant; (iii) external trauma to the implant during the time it was in Ms.
		We know that Dow's failure to warn was a cause of her injury; whether Dr. Birch's actions in the hypothetical situation posited by Dow might also have been a cause is not a matter for Ms.
	www.lexum.umontreal.ca /csc-scc/en/pub/1995/vol4/html/1995scr4_0634.html (19116 words)

	People v. Morse - California DUI Lawyers
		esult directly caused by his act even if there is another contributing cause.
		Officer McCree went to the front of appellant's house and, in response to questions about how his work was going, stated "It's a piece of cake." Appellant sought to introduce this statement but the trial court excluded it.
		On appeal, just as with the excluded "tool factor" evidence, appellant contends the relevance of the excluded statement was officer negligence or recklessness so extreme as to constitute a supervening, exonerating cause.
	www.dui1.com /DuiCaseLawDetail14013/Page7.htm (524 words)

	Janiak v. Ippolito, 1985 CanLII 62 (S.C.C.)
		The principle he elicited from the English authorities is that a tort victim's unreasonable refusal to undergo medical treatment constitutes an intervening cause which effectively cuts off the liability of the initial tortfeasor.
		Other courts have suggested that the doctrine of avoidable consequence is an extension of the proximate cause principle--that is, if the plaintiff could reasonably have avoided the damages which resulted, then the activity of the defendant can no longer be considered the proximate cause of those damages.
		While this statement can be accepted as theoretically valid (since "proximate cause" probably means nothing more than the cause which is recognized by law as the cause of the damages), it is not precise enough to express the idea contained in the doctrine of avoidable consequences.
	www.canlii.org /ca/cas/scc/1985/1985scc8.html (7569 words)

	Ohio Defendants Owed No "Special Duty" When Vandal Dropped Road Construction Debris Off Bridge; Third-Party Criminal ...
		Concluding that no negligence by any defendant was the proximate cause of Feichtner's wife's death, the trial court granted summary judgment to the city and the contractors and dismissed the case.
		During the winter, vandals threw construction materials on the building and caused "significant damage." While the trial court found the contractor owed no duty to Federal, the appellate court disagreed and reversed.
		The appeals court acknowledged that "[o]rdinarily there is no duty to control the conduct of a third person by preventing him or her from causing harm to another.
	www.usroads.com /journals/p/rilj/9710/ri971001.htm (1571 words)

Try your search on: Qwika (all wikis)