2.  1. Duty-The accused wrongdoer owed a duty of care to the injured person  2. Breach of Duty- the defendant’s conduct breached that duty  3. Causation-defendant’s conduct caused the plaintiff’s harm  4. Damages-the plaintiff suffered actual injuries or losses  McDonald’s Hot coffee suit

3.  Idealized-a person who acts the way the community expects members to act  Certain professions have a higher standard  Minors driving are held to same standards as adults

4.  Cause in fact-harm would not have occurred with out the act  Proximate cause-close connection between the harm in question and the act that caused it  Example: You wrongfully cross the yellow line and hit a truck. Truck carries dynamite and kills a person two blocks away. Are you negligently responsible for the death?

5.  Must prove actual damages-plaintiff is entitled to be restored to pre-injury condition  Damages- the money that may be required to accomplish this

6.  negligence-people can recover damages for injuries if they prove each of the elements by a preponderance of evidence  1. Contributory defense: cannot receive damages if you in any way contributed to the harm suffered  2. Comparative negligence-used in most states- dividing the loss according to the degree to which each person is responsible  3. Assumption of Risk defense-person voluntarily encounters a known danger and decides to accept the risk of that danger.

7.  Liability without proof of fault  Risk or danger cannot be eliminated even by reasonable care.  Example: demolition of downtown building-even if demolition is necessary, use of dynamite is knowingly dangerous and any injuries that result are the fault of the company without proof

8.  Result of toxic chemicals or hazardous materials  Owners are strictly liable  Defective products-Product Liability Manufacturers have a legal responsibility for those injured by their products. Drives cost of products up due to research and testing.

9.  DON’T have to prove fault  DO have to prove causation and damage  Defendant could try to show no causation or damage occurred.  Defendant can prove that consumer misused a product or failed to follow the safety precautions

10.  Ideally, tort law should… 1. compensate harmed persons 2. fairly allocate benefits to victims and costs to wrongdoers. 3. deter risky and dangerous behavior

11.  $$ awards too costly  Lawyers cost a lot and get all the money  Disputes take too long to settle

12.  Binding arbitration-to avoid cost of trial  No fault auto insurance-no need for civil suit in an accident  Statute of limitations-claim filed within 2/3 years of incident  Cap of damages-especially punitive damages and pain & suffering damages

13.  --Cases without merit-belief that many bring cases such as these to court against companies that will knowingly settle out of court

14.  Great Britain-losing party pays the other sides legal fees  Reformers argue this would not be a hardship on plaintiffs with strong claims because if they won the defendant would pay both sides legal fees  Con: Plaintiffs would be reluctant to sue- end in court order to pay both fees  Con: average lawsuit damages $30,000, very few really costly payouts

15.  Con-Incentive to produce safe products and services  Careful development and testing  Safety training  Proper warning for consumers