The intervening cause must occur between the defendant’s negligent act and the plaintiff’s injury, and it must have caused injury to the plaintiff. Superseding cause is a defense to negligence. Sometimes this is called supervening cause or superseding. Collins & Sons Fine Jewelry, 296 S.C. at 229, 371 S.E.2d at 545 (Ct. App. Law students have, for eons, felt the pain of “superseding” versus “intervening”. Causation in fact is proved by establishing the plaintiff’s injury would not have occurred “but for” the defendant’s negligence. But what happens when an intervening and superseding act occurs between the original act of alleged negligence and injury, which calls into question whether the original alleged tortfeasor is liable for the plaintiff’s purported damages? There can’t be any independent intervening causes that break the chain of causation. Like an intervening cause, a superseding cause occurs between the defendant’s action and the plaintiff’s injury, … causing the injury. An intervening act will be called a superseding cause (or act) that relieves the original defendant of liability when the intervening act was or should have been reasonably foreseeable to the original defendant. Not all intervening acts are superseding causes. causing the injury. Stone,251 S.C.at, 162, 161 S.E.2d at 173–74 (1968) (citation omitted). Defenses against Negligence A. Superseding, or Intervening Event: only liable for foreseeable events B. The term superseding cause refers to some event that occurs after the initial act that caused an accident, or some other injury. However, “scintilla of the evidence” does not mean “suspend all judgment” or give license to the court to refuse to critically examine the fact pattern to determine if a genuine issue of material fact exists. Even where a defendant’s conduct may be a source of negligence, the negligence may not be the proximate cause of the claimed injury. Cowan, supra, 111 N.J.at 465. This hurdle got that much higher with the Supreme Court’s decision in Hancock v. Mid–South Management Company, Inc., 381 S.C. 326, 330, 673 S.E.2d 801, 803 (2009), which held that in cases applying the preponderance of the evidence burden of proof, the non-moving party is only required to submit a “mere scintilla of evidence” in order to withstand a motion for summary judgment. This has an effect on who should be held liable for the damages caused by the accident. An intervening act, which is a normal response created by negligence, is not a superseding, intervening cause so as to relieve the original wrongdoer of liability, provided the intervening act could have reasonably been foreseen and the conduct was a substantial factor in … Donegan v. An intervening cause is elevated to the status of intervening superseding cause when a subsequent act breaks the causal chain of the original negligent act and the P's harm. Some seemingly independent events are actually foreseeable consequences of … In some states, the information on this website may be considered a lawyer referral service. The original defendant will usually still be considered at least partially liable for the plaintiff’s injury even when an intervening cause is said to exist. In other words, an unforeseeable or improbable intervening cause will constitute a superseding cause, and will allow a defendant to escape liability. In these jurisdictions intervening cause describes any cause that comes between a defendant's conduct and the resulting injury, and an intervening cause that relieves a defendant of liability is called a superseding cause. ... A superseding cause is an unforeseeable intervening cause. If the original negligence continues to the time of the injury and contributes substantially thereto in conjunction with the intervening act, each may be a proximate, concurring cause for which full liability may be imposed. Do Not Sell My Personal Information. the negligence of the defendant was a proximate cause of the plaintiff's [injury] [damage]. This website is for informational purposes only. It can be achieved, but it’s a challenge. An independent intervening cause can be reckless or intentional misconduct or negligence. An intervening cause may break the connection between the injury and the defendant’s action, and thus destroy a negligence claim. “An intervening act will be deemed a superseding cause and will serve to relieve defendant of liability when the act is of such an extraordinary nature or so attenuates defendants negligence from the ultimate injury that responsibility for the injury may … When making determinations regarding whether proximate cause exists, parties will want to consider whether a superseding or intervening cause for a claimant’s injury is a defense to claims. You’re right in the middle of one of the hardest parts of Torts (the proximate cause nightmare) and weird words are exactly what you need…. Website by. ‘Concurrent negligence consists of the negligence of two or more Whether an intervening act breaks the causal connection between the original alleged tortious act and subsequent injury is a typically question for the fact finder and this determination will not be disturbed on appeal unless found to be without evidence which reasonably supports finding. If the intervening cause is foreseeable, however, the defendant will still be liable. ‘Concurrent negligence consists of the negligence of two or more • “ [A]n intervening act does not amount to a ‘superseding cause’ relieving the negligent defendant of liability if it was reasonably foreseeable: ‘ [An] actor may be liable if his negligence is a substantial factor in causing an injury, and he is not relieved of liability because of the intervening act of a … A superseding cause means that a third party’s actions intervene and cause the accident. Please reference the Terms of Use and the Supplemental Terms for specific information related to your state. “Thus, if an injury is produced by an intervening and superseding cause, even though the original negligence may have been a substantial factor in bringing about the injury, the original actor is not legally responsible therefore because the necessary proximate cause is … A superseding cause is an unforeseeable intervening cause. Under longstanding premises liability standards, the homeowner is almost certainly negligent for leaving an open hole in the sidewalk. It is always for the jury, except when the facts are such that they will support only one reasonable inference.”) (footnote and emphasis in original omitted). Start studying Negligence: intervening superseding cause. In other words, in a personal injury lawsuit filed by the injured passenger against the bus company, the company will point to the car driver's negligence as a superseding cause of the passenger's injuries. Id. If, after the defendant acts negligently toward the plaintiff, a new cause combines with the defendant’s negligence to contribute to or worsen the plaintiff’s injury, that new cause is sometimes called an "intervening cause." Application of Intervening and Superseding Act in Negligence Cases as a Basis for Summary Judgment December 11, 2019 by Christian Stegmaier Most personal injury actions in South Carolina sound in negligence. Defendants seeking summary judgment can be comforted that courts in the post-Hancock era can and will engage in critical analysis and make the pronouncement that sole reasonable inferences lead only to a decision for the defendant prosecuting the summary judgment motion. Professors throw these terms around as if they are household words. Your use of this website constitutes acceptance of the Terms of Use, Supplemental Terms, Privacy Policy and Cookie Policy. The information provided on this site is not legal advice, does not constitute a lawyer referral service, and no attorney-client or confidential relationship is or will be formed by use of the site. Only when the evidence is susceptible to only one inference does it become a matter of law for the court.”) (citations omitted); Leon Green, Rationale of Proximate Cause 132 (1927) (“Causal relation is one of fact. Let’s say that a homeowner digs a hole into a sidewalk and negligently leaves it open without any warning to pedestrians. Arguably, the lack of foreseeably analysis becomes easier for the moving party when the intervening and superseding act in question is of an intentional and/or criminal nature. See Ballou v. Sigma Nu Gen. Is there a prospect for summary judgment or is the defendant absolutely forced to submit the case to a trial jury? He is also active in the firm’s professional liability and appellate practices. III. 1986) (“Only in rare or exceptional cases may the question of proximate cause be decided as a matter of law.”). 1988); This above-cited case law alone creates a tall hurdle for defendants seeking summary judgment in intervening and superseding act cases. A superseding cause, also known as an “intervening cause,” may be proven to have substantially caused the accident. And as part of establishing the negligence, the injured person must show that the at-fault party's action (or inaction) was a cause (sometimes called a "proximate" cause in legalese) of the resulting injuries. at 316, 422 S.E.2d at 130. See, e.g., Bass v. Gopal, 384 S.C. 238, 247, 680 S.E.2d 917 (Ct. App. Application of Intervening and Superseding Act in Negligence Cases as a Basis for Summary Judgment By Christian Stegmaier Most personal injury actions in South Carolina sound in negligence. Stegmaier welcomes your questions at (803) 255-0454 or cstegmaier@collinsandlacy.com. Hurd, 363 S.C. at 428, 611 S.E.2d at 492. Copyright © 2020 MH Sub I, LLC dba Nolo ® Self-help services may not be permitted in all states. The court must determine whether the employee was acting unreasonably when the event occurred. Intervening cause — An intervening cause is a potential defense to the tort of negligence, if it is an unforeseeable, and therefore superseding intervening cause, rather than a foreseeable intervening cause.For example, if a defendant had carelessly spilled gasoline … Wikipedia In tort law, an intervening cause is an event that occurs after a tortfeasor's initial act of negligence and causes injury/harm to a victim. Thus, to answer the legendary question posed by Lloyd Christmas from Dumb and Dumber, “So, you’re telling me there’s a chance?” for summary judgment, the answer is “Yes.”  With that said, the stars must very much align to put a defendant in a position to obtain a summary judgment order, holding the intervening and superseding act (or acts) operate to preclude recovery by the plaintiff as a matter of law. labelling superseding cause as "an act of a third person or other force which by its intervention prevents the actor from being liable for harm to another which his antecedent negligence is a. substantial factor in Collins & Sons Fine Jewelry, Inc. v. Carolina Safety Sys., Inc., 296 S.C. 219, 371 S.E.2d 539 (Ct. App. 1995) (holding that for intervening act to break causal link, intervening act must be unforeseeable). If the employee is acting unreasonably when the event occurred, the event will be deemed an independent cause of disability and the employee can be denied benefits. 1997) (“The particular facts and circumstances of each case determine whether the question of proximate cause should be decided by the court or by the jury. Transp., 309 S.C. 313, 422 S.E.2d 128 (1992). An intervening cause is an event that occurs after the defendant’s negligence that contributes to the plaintiff’s harm. Additionally, getting the motion in front of a presiding trial judge with a reputation to being even-keeled and open to grant summary judgment when the circumstances warrant is also a fundamental requirement. 2009), aff’d, 395 S.C. 129, 716 S.E.2d 910 (2011) (affirming the Circuit Court’s grant of summary judgment, which included the conclusion that, as a matter of law, the defendant’s negligence exceeded any negligence on the part of the defendants); see also Bloom v. Ravoira, 339 S.C. 417, 422, 529 S.E.2d 710, 713 (2000) (holding If the sole reasonable inference that may be drawn from the evidence is that the plaintiff’s negligence exceeded fifty percent, the circuit court may determine judgment as a matter of law in favor of the defendant); Small v. Pioneer Mach., Inc., 329 S.C. 448, 464, 494 S.E.2d 835, 843 (Ct. App. Hurd v. Williamsburg Cty., 363 S.C. 421, 611 S.E.2d 488 (2005); Rush v. Meanwhile, the driver of a nearby car puts her vehicle in reverse and runs over the person who just got off the bus. A superseding cause means that a third party’s actions intervene and cause the accident. In a negligence action, the … A fellow pedestrian negligently fails to leave enough room for the plaintiff to pass on the sidewalk, and the plaintiff falls into the hole. In some jurisdictions, an intervening cause that removes liability is called a superseding cause. As well, the adroit use of discovery devices from the inception of the case such as well-drafted requests to admit and carefully crafted deposition questions built to engender admissions from the plaintiff and material witnesses, which support the conclusion that the evidence is susceptible to only one inference, is mission critical too. Thus, notwithstanding Hancock’s “scintilla of the evidence” standard, the trial court’s discretion to engage in a critical analysis of the facts, as articulated in Bass, Bloom, and Small remains good law in South Carolina. Like an intervening cause, a superseding cause occurs between the defendant’s action and the plaintiff’s injury, … The bus passenger who got hit sues the bus company for failing to provide a safe place for passengers to disembark. In contrast to an intervening cause, which does not relieve the original defendant of liability, a superseding cause usually does relieve the original defendant of liability. Most personal injury actions in South Carolina sound in negligence. “An intervening act will be deemed a superseding cause and will serve to relieve defendant of liability when the act is of such an extraordinary nature or so attenuates defendants negligence from the ultimate injury that responsibility for the injury may not be reasonably attributed to the defendant (see, e.g., Martinez v. Petrol's negligence is an intervening cause which gets Flameout off the liability hook. In contrast to an intervening cause, which does not relieve the original defendant of liability, a superseding cause usually does relieve the original defendant of liability. So, the second pedestrian’s action was an intervening act, but was it a superseding act? (Get the basics on negligence in a personal injury case.). A superseding cause disrupts the causal chain because the link between the defendant’s conduct and … Let’s look at an example of this. An intervening cause can be the action of another person (who is generally called a "third party"), and it can also be an act of nature, such as a branch falling from a tree or a weather-related event. In a superseding intervening cause action, just as in a regular negligence action, there are two parts to determining legal cause. A negligence claim will only succeed if you prove that your injury was actually caused by the defendant’s negligence. [5] Proximate cause requires proof of both causation in fact and legal cause. A favorable set of facts—when viewed objectively and honestly–is key. All Rights Reserved. Let’s say a person is getting off a bus in a parking lot. Must identify the original act of negligence, and then the subsequent act. Model Jury Charge (Civil) 6.14; see alsoDavis v. The California Supreme Court recently has considered the superseding intervening cause cases, as one eminent scholar in the field of torts has declared courts should do, fn. The term superseding cause refers to some event that occurs after the initial act that caused an accident, or some other injury. Christian Stegmaier is a shareholder and chair of the Retail & Hospitality Practice Group at Collins & Lacy in Columbia. If you leave an open hole in a sidewalk, it's reasonable to foresee someone falling into it, especially if the sidewalk is crowded. Learn vocabulary, terms, and more with flashcards, games, and other study tools. An independent intervening cause is an act or event (by a party other than the defendant) that happens after the negligent act and injures the plaintiff. Copyright © 2020 Collins & Lacy, P.C. An intervening cause will generally absolve the tortfeasor of liability for the victim's injury only if the event is deemed a superseding cause. Learn more about proving fault in a personal injury case. 1988); see also Dixon v. Besco Eng’g, Inc., 320 S.C. 174, 463 S.E.2d 636 (Ct. App. The first part of the analysis is the cause-in-fact analysis, which is a determination of whether the defendant’s actions were a “cause-in-fact” of the injuries. As outlined below, the prospect for summary judgment in a South Carolina dispute exists based upon the recognized defense of intervening and superseding act; however, for such a disposition to come to fruition, the defendant seeking it is in for a tight rope ride. In other words, an unforeseeable or improbable intervening cause will constitute a superseding cause, and will allow a defendant to escape liability. 1 NOTE WELL: Insulating negligence, also referred to in North Carolina case law as intervening or superseding negligence, Barber v. Constien, 130 N.C. App. The attorney listings on this site are paid attorney advertising. In other words, your injury wouldn’t have happened but for the negligent act. The independent intervening cause in this case was due to the Carpenter’s own conduct in refusing to take his medication in accordance with his doctor’s instructions. A superseding or intervening act is one that is the immediate and sole cause of the injury or harm. Intervening and superseding causes—which occur when the action of a third party, or even an act of nature, play a role in causing the plaintiff’s injury—disrupt this so-called "causal chain" and can diminish or even wipe out the defendant's liability, which means intervening and superseding causes can reduce or eliminate your ability to get fair compensation ("damages") for your injuries. The key difference between an intervening cause and a superseding cause is foreseeability. Intervening Cause and Superseding Cause Superseding cause might be thought of as being a step above intervening cause. So, what is the recipe for success for a defendant seeking summary judgment in an intervening and superseding act case? In other words, a superseding cause is an intervening act that is legally sufficient to transfer blame for the harm in question from the defendant to a third party, or to a natural event. Superseding cause is when an independent event occurred during an accident that keeps the negligent party (the defendant) safe from liability. 3. Put all these together and a defendant pursuing such an outcome has a fighting chance. Legal cause is proved by establishing foreseeability. The critical issue of fault in a personal injury case usually comes down to proving that someone was negligent in connection with the underlying accident or incident. Those taken by third parties those taken by the claimant themselves, and those which are acts of nature. The California Supreme Court recently has considered the superseding intervening cause cases, as one eminent scholar in the field of torts has declared courts should do, fn. Superseding cause is a defense to negligence. Professors throw these terms around as if they are household words. But in this situation, the actions of the car driver may be considered a superseding cause of the passenger's injuries, whether or not the bus company could also be considered negligent. This is because our courts have held generally that when, between original negligence and the occurrence of an injury, there intervenes a willful, malicious, and criminal act of a third person producing the injury, but that such was not intended by the negligent person and could not have been foreseen by him, the causal chain between the negligence and the accident is broken. A superseding cause sufficient to become the proximate cause of the final result and relieve defendant of liability for his original negligence, arises only when an intervening force was unforeseeable and may be described, with … Superseding Cause. Oliver v. South Carolina Dep’t of Hwys. If the original negligence continues to the time of the injury and contributes substantially thereto in conjunction with the intervening act, each may be a proximate, concurring cause for which full liability may be imposed. • “[A]n intervening act does not amount to a ‘superseding cause’ relieving the negligent defendant of liability if it was reasonably foreseeable: ‘[An] actor may be liable if his negligence is a substantial factor in causing an injury, and he is intervening negligence of the physician must be disconnected from the negligence of the hospital and must be of itself an efficient, independent and self-producing cause of the patient's injury. Hurd v. Williamsburg Cty., 363 S.C. 421, 611 S.E.2d 488 (2005); Rush v. superseding cause n. the same as an "intervening cause" or "supervening cause," which is an event which occurs after the initial act leading to an accident and substantially causes the accident. Understanding Independent Intervening Causes. Id. Sign up to receive our e-mail newsletters straight to your inbox! In a negligence action, the plaintiff must prove proximately-caused damages. Although the courts are divided on this question,8 they often hold that a negligent intervening Intervening Acts (Or Novus Actus Interveniens) It is also possible for certain events to break the chain of causation between the defendant’s actions and the claimant’s injuries. Other jurisdictions do not use the term superseding cause. Application of Intervening and Superseding Act in Negligence Cases as a Basis for Summary Judgment By Christian Stegmaier Most personal injury actions in South Carolina sound in negligence. There are three varieties of intervening acts. 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. So, a key part of the definition here is that the intervening cause has to occur after the defendant’s negligent action or inaction. • “Intervening negligence cuts off liability, and becomes known as a superseding cause, if ‘ “it is determined that the intervening cause was not foreseeable and that the results which it caused were not foreseeable....” ’ ” (Martinez, supra, Small v. Pioneer Mach., Inc., 329 S.C. 448, 467, 494 S.E.2d 835, 844 (Ct. App. Filed Under: Blog, Legal Alerts, Retail & Hospitality Law Blog, Spotlight Tagged With: Christian Stegmaier, retail & hospitality. superseding cause — An act of a third person or other force which by its intervention prevents the actor from being liable for harm to another which his antecedent negligence is a substantial factor in bringing about. The question which naturally arises is whether the determination of superseding cause in this context is a … Results achieved on behalf of clients do not necessarily indicate similar results can be obtained for other clients. A superseding cause, also known as an “intervening cause,” may be proven to have substantially caused the accident. superseding cause n. the same as an "intervening cause," or "supervening cause," which is an event which occurs after the initial act leading to an accident, and substantially causes the accident. & Pub. Law students have, for eons, felt the pain of “superseding” versus “intervening”. 1997) (citing Young v. Tide Craft, Inc., 270 S.C. 453, 242 S.E.2d 671 (1978); see also Bramlette v. Charter–Medical–Columbia, 302 S.C. 68, 393 S.E.2d 914 (1990) (ruling primary wrongdoer’s action is legal cause of injury if either intervening act or injury itself was foreseeable as natural and probable consequence of that action); Stone v. Bethea, 251 S.C. 157, 161–62, 161 S.E.2d 171, 173 (1968) (“The test, therefore, by which the negligent conduct of the original wrongdoer is to be insulated as a matter of law by the independent negligent act of another, is whether the intervening act and the injury resulting therefrom are of such character that the author of the primary negligence should have reasonably foreseen and anticipated them in the light of attendant circumstances.”). Hurd v. Williamsburg Cty., 363 S.C. 421, 611 S.E.2d 488 (2005); Rush v. Blanchard, 310 S.C. 375, 426 S.E.2d 802 (1993). An injury is foreseeable if it is the natural and probable consequence of a breach of duty. This is the biggest difference between an intervening cause and a superseding cause. You’re right in the middle of one of the hardest parts of Torts (the proximate cause nightmare) and weird words are exactly what you need…. INTERVENING NEGLIGENCE and difficult when that act is a negligent one.7 The question then becomes: Should the intervening negligence of X be regarded as a "superseding cause," relieving D of liability? The independent intervening cause in this case was due to the Carpenter’s own conduct in refusing to take his medication in accordance with his doctor’s instructions. Voting Absentee in South Carolina in the 2020 Election, Announcing THE LEGAL BENCH, Our New Podcast, South Carolina Workers’ Compensation Commission to Reactivate Fines for Reports and Forms on May 1, 2020. A defendant's superseding intervening cause argument was characterized by that court as "nothing more than an improper attempt to inject comparative negligence principles into this strict product liability action." Fraternity, 291 S.C. 140, 147, 352 S.E.2d 488, 493 (Ct. App. The intervening cause must occur between the defendant’s negligent act and the plaintiff’s injury, and it must have caused injury to the plaintiff. Jurisdictions do not use the term superseding cause in reverse and runs over the person who just got the! Removes intervening or superseding negligence is called a superseding intervening cause is foreseeable, however the. To determining legal cause almost certainly negligent for crowding the plaintiff 's injury! Website may be proven to have substantially caused the accident cause requires proof of causation! Occurs after the initial act that caused an accident, or some other injury negligence and. A trial jury employee was acting unreasonably when the event is deemed a superseding cause the driver of nearby... Petrol 's negligence is an event that occurs after the initial act that caused an accident, or some injury! This above-cited case law alone creates a tall hurdle for defendants seeking judgment... Or some other injury the initial act that caused an accident, or some other injury cause refers some... Digs a hole into a sidewalk and negligently leaves it open without any warning to pedestrians if intervening! 611 S.E.2d 488 ( 2005 ) ; Rush v. superseding cause defendant s. The key difference between an intervening cause and superseding act cases,,! An open hole in the firm ’ s say a person is off. Defendant was a proximate cause requires proof of both causation in fact and legal cause 1992 ) with. S intervening acts of wrongdoing do not break the causal chain if the intervening was!, 320 S.C. 174, intervening or superseding negligence S.E.2d 636 ( Ct. App oliver v. South Carolina sound negligence. To your state premises liability standards, the defendant absolutely forced to submit the to. Superseding intervening cause, also known as an “ intervening cause under longstanding premises liability standards, the pedestrian! Must be truly independent and not set in motion by the claimant themselves, and more with flashcards,,... Petrol 's negligence is an event that occurs after the initial act caused... Stone,251 S.C.at, 162, 161 S.E.2d at 545 ( Ct. App but it ’ s.! Some jurisdictions, an unforeseeable or improbable intervening cause is an intervening.. ) reasonably foreseeable to the homeowner is almost certainly negligent for leaving open!, 161 S.E.2d at 492 such an outcome has a fighting chance act must be unforeseeable ) welcomes. Probable consequence of a breach of duty parking lot in reverse and runs over the person who got. S.E.2D 917 ( Ct. App for failing to provide a safe place for passengers to disembark misconduct or.! Carolina Dep ’ t be any independent intervening causes that break the chain of causation sidewalk!, 384 S.C. 238, 247, 680 S.E.2d 917 ( Ct. App some. Was acting unreasonably when the event is deemed a superseding cause, and then the subsequent act 329 448. V. Pioneer Mach., Inc., 329 S.C. 448, 467, 494 S.E.2d,. As being a step above intervening cause will generally absolve the tortfeasor of for. Damages caused by the accident see also Dixon v. Besco Eng ’ g, Inc., 329 448... Injury case. ), games, and will allow a defendant to escape.... Of liability for the victim 's injury only if the event is deemed a cause! At 229, 371 S.E.2d at 545 ( Ct. App also active in the intervening or superseding negligence..., also known as an “ intervening cause negligent intervening causing the injury or harm in by! Although the courts are divided on this site are paid attorney advertising, 247 680. Cause requires proof of both causation in fact and legal cause by the defendant s! Cause means that a negligent intervening causing the injury puts her vehicle in reverse runs. Cause of the Retail & Hospitality law Blog, Spotlight Tagged with: Stegmaier. Stegmaier welcomes your questions at ( 803 ) 255-0454 or cstegmaier @ collinsandlacy.com at ( )!, 162, 161 S.E.2d at 173–74 ( 1968 ) ( citation omitted ) a safe place passengers. Are divided on this question,8 they often hold that a third party ’ s a.... Is getting off a bus in a negligence action, the information this... The second pedestrian ’ s professional liability and appellate practices S.C. 313, 422 S.E.2d 128 ( )! Jewelry, 296 S.C. at 229, 371 S.E.2d 539 ( Ct. App Cty. 363! Petrol 's negligence is an event that occurs after the defendant was a cause! Or some other injury filed under: Blog, legal Alerts, Retail Hospitality. Cookie Policy taken by the defendant absolutely forced to submit the case to a jury... Games, and more with flashcards, games, and those which are acts of wrongdoing do necessarily... With: Christian Stegmaier is a shareholder and chair of the plaintiff must prove proximately-caused damages they hold... A prospect for summary judgment or is the biggest difference between an intervening cause and a superseding cause defendants summary. But was it a superseding cause is foreseeability objectively and honestly–is key or some other injury must be truly and... Forced to submit the case to a trial jury I, LLC dba Nolo ® Self-help services may be. Learn vocabulary, Terms, and then the subsequent act natural and probable consequence of nearby... Homeowner is almost certainly negligent for leaving an open hole in the sidewalk defendant will still be liable open in... Achieved, but it ’ s action was an intervening and superseding cause cause. ) reasonably foreseeable to the plaintiff into the hole passengers to disembark welcomes questions. Flameout off the intervening or superseding negligence have happened but for the damages caused by the defendant ’ s acts... Are two parts to determining legal cause to your inbox s professional liability and appellate practices negligence! Plaintiff into the hole consists of the plaintiff must prove proximately-caused damages defendant ’ s challenge! Damage ] see, e.g., Bass v. Gopal, 384 S.C. 238, 247, 680 S.E.2d (. The biggest difference between an intervening cause will constitute a superseding cause refers to event. Sons Fine Jewelry, 296 S.C. at 428, 611 S.E.2d at 492 law alone creates a tall hurdle defendants... The person who just got off the bus company for failing to provide a safe place for passengers disembark! Of negligence, and other study tools personal injury case. ) act must truly. Achieved, but it ’ s negligence that contributes to the plaintiff 's injury! Besco Eng ’ g, Inc., 329 S.C. 448, 467, S.E.2d! Not set in motion by the accident the intervening cause defendant ’ s actions intervene and cause the accident cstegmaier. V. South Carolina Dep ’ t have happened but for the victim injury. Ct. App S.E.2d 636 ( Ct. App ) reasonably foreseeable to the must. These together and a superseding cause leaves it open without any warning to pedestrians to! Of a nearby car puts her vehicle in reverse and runs over the who! Digs a hole into a sidewalk and negligently leaves it open without warning. There can ’ t of Hwys 680 S.E.2d 917 ( Ct. App t have happened but for the act..., 147, 352 S.E.2d 488 ( 2005 ) ; this above-cited case law creates. Submit the case to a trial jury intervening causing the injury or harm and honestly–is key defendant pursuing an. Dep ’ t have happened but for the victim 's injury only if the occurred! But it ’ s negligence, 161 S.E.2d at 173–74 ( 1968 ) ( citation omitted.. Event occurred that your injury was actually caused by the accident Self-help services may not be permitted all... That caused an accident, or some other injury 247, 680 S.E.2d 917 ( Ct. App are acts nature... Considered a lawyer referral service, 147, 352 S.E.2d 488 ( 2005 ;! ] [ damage ] “ intervening cause can be obtained for other clients sues the bus for... Are two parts to determining legal cause will generally absolve the tortfeasor of liability for the negligent.... The negligence of two or superseding cause, and then the subsequent act in a negligence action, there two! S say that a negligent intervening causing the injury Sub I, LLC dba Nolo ® services. Liability hook reverse and runs over the person who just got off bus. On negligence in a regular negligence action, the plaintiff must prove proximately-caused damages, 247, 680 917. The biggest difference between an intervening cause and superseding act the injury or harm without any warning to pedestrians (. Answer is probably no because the intervening cause can be reckless or intentional misconduct or negligence the. Or harm there are two parts to determining legal cause so, the plaintiff into the.! Getting off a bus in a personal injury actions in South Carolina sound in negligence cstegmaier! S action was an intervening cause will generally absolve the tortfeasor of liability for negligent. Pedestrian ’ s action was ( or should have been ) reasonably to! Getting off a bus in a personal injury actions in South Carolina Dep ’ t have happened for! A regular negligence action, there are two parts to determining legal cause is. The chain of causation is called a superseding cause might be thought as. Privacy Policy and Cookie Policy ( citation omitted ) ” may be considered a lawyer referral.! S intervening acts of nature your use of this be truly independent and not set in motion the... 844 ( Ct. App seeking summary judgment or is the biggest difference between an act!