Date Name Trigger Facts

1676 Mitchell v. Alestree breaking a horse in town square

1883 Heaven v. Pender
1916 MacPherson v Buick sue manufacturer and wheel maker
falsely labeled poison; labeller (not
1852 Thomas v. Winchester druggist) was liable
1870 Loop v Litchfield circular saw balance wheel defect
1873 LoSee v Clute steam boiler explodes
scaffold injures workers and builder is
1882 Devlin v. Smith liable

1909 Statler v Ray Mfg coffee urn explodes

1842 Winterbottom v Wright

2010 AW v. Lancaster school allows in molester; ew!!

boy falls in broken stairwell; racist

2001 Am Life v. Ruvalcaba bullshit

tenant notifies landlord of broken

1968 Rowland v Christian hand and her boyfriend cuts his hand
Friend knows of immediate assault and
2000 Iverson v Cash?? murder but does not intervene
man visits mine; owner dares him to
1959 Yania v. Bigan jump and he drowns

1976 Farwell v. Keaton friend leaves friend who is injured

man does not intervene when
girlfriend attempts suicide. Calls 911
1996 Webstad v. Stortini after she passes out.
therapist knew that man intended
murder and when he reported, police
1976 Tarasoff v. Regents of UC did not intervene

mentally ill man kills family after they

warn his doctors of his behavior; policy
1997 Morgan v. Fairfield Family Counseling not to intervene guided behavior
Mentally ill man kills livein girlfriend;
therapist did not have knowledge of
1990 Dunkle v. Food Service East imminent harm
1999 DTD v. Johnson ex-frat member assaults guest at party

Man asks police for protection when

tenants are abusive to him and wife;
police never show up and tenants
1987 Cuffy v. City of NY assault family

women gets order against ex-husband;

he threatens to kill her and daughter;
police dismiss threat and he assaults
1985 Sorichetti v. City of NY them
woman startled by horses has
1896 Mitchell v. Rochester Ry Co (overturned) miscarriage

parent and sibling witness child's

1996 Clohessy v. Bachelor accidental death

1968 Dillon v. Legg

Strazza
Thing v. La Chusa
1992 Burgess v. Superior Ct child is injured during delivery

physician misdiagnoses syphilis and

1980 Molien v. Kaiser Found. Hospital hustand is "direct victim"
pharmacist doubles dose and parents
1993 Huggins v. Longs Drug Stores CA administer to infant
Christensen
man tapes consensual sex and shares
1993 Boyles v. Kerr video

1998 Majca v. Beekil HIV exposure from used utensils

Firestone dumps liquid toxic waste in

violation of landfill rules that infests
1993 Potter v. Firestone Tire groundwater that locals drink

woman diagnosed late with cancer

(malpractice) and her wife sues for
2008 Charron v. Amaral consortium once gay marriage is legal

1990 Reagan v. Vaughn child loses parent

 railway accident forces closure of
1985 People Express Air v Consolidated Rail airport
Holding Exception/Duty Rule
Duty to use care if harm is foreseeable general
Ordinary care and skill to avoid injury in circumstances general
final inspector has a duty to ensure safety general

if danger is foreseen, the duty is to avoid injury general

not liable if danger is not imminent general
final tester is responsible general
he owed a duty to the users even though they had not paid
for it general
inherently dangerous product when used as instructed,
should not cause injury. (Ie, burns OK but explosion, no) general
(overturned bc does not account for supply chain--direct sale
no longer considered necessary for duty) general
no foreseeability = no duty general

no duty because he was not an invitee of owner and private

building has no public licensees and "no sufficient evidence"
of negligence--even though owner was a professional
landlord. landowners and occupiers

tenant had duty to warn licensee of danger and was therefore

liable for harm. landowners and occupiers

no duty as bystander to rescue rescuer

no duty to rescue if it would endanger you rescuer

duty exists not to leave victim worse off if you have initiated
care (cannot abandon rescue) rescuer/voluntary assumption

don't want duty? Be a rich white dude; also, no special

relationship (ie formal power) means no duty special relationship
special relationship privilege is not greater than duty to warn
when specific harm is known; therapist privilege stll requires
reporting. special relationship

Therapists who have notice of danger have a special

relationship special relationship
victim was "non-foreseeable victim" and therefore generally
propensity to violence did not create a duty to
warn/intervene---this is crap!! special relationship
fraternity had duty to protect guests given that prior incidents
exist and licensees were present; totality of circumstances
test used; national fraternity did not gratuitously assume duty

no public duty: (1) assumption via promise; (2) knowledge by

agent of inaction leading to harm; (3) direct contact btwn
agents and party; (4) reliance on the promise. public duty

protective order established special relationship special relationship

fright is not recoverable (overruled) direct risk

Emotional distress requires: (1) close relation to victim; (2)

perception of event or immediate aftermath; (3) substantial
injury; (4) serious emotional injury beyond stranger's
response but not abnormal emotional distress
(1) proximity to accident; (2) impact based on perception; (3)
close relationship to victim emotional distress

contemporaneous perception required

physician has a duty to pregnant woman re fetus' care direct victim

(1) damages do not require physical injury; (2) cause of action

where duty based on special relationship is breached direct victim
no duty because parents were not patients, therefore not
direct victims. WTF direct victim

no emotional distress because no physical harm or other

breach; TX on emotional distress
recoverable only if exposure was actually possible (via known
route) real risk

suit fails for possible future harm based on exposure;

emotional distress would need to prove likelihood of
developing cancer future harm

could not retroactively sue, even though they would have

been married if it were possible. WTF consortium/GLBT
consortium is appropriate, for minor/adult and
typical/disabled child consortium
special relationship or identified class of plaintiffs; fishing
interests; private acts for public nuisance purely economic loss
Notes

trichotomy rarely used now but: invitee=money; licensee= social; trespasser = uninvited

exceptions: traps and child trespassers