NEGLIGENCE REQUIREMENTS AND POTENTIAL DEFENSES TO MYRA’S CLAIM
2
Date: 2016/02/15
To: Cassie Cardigan, CEO
CARDWARE Inc.
From: Warren Thomas
Re: Negligence Requirements and Potential Defenses to Myra’s Claim
In order to prove negligence in the case of Myra v. CARDWARE, there are several items that must be proved by the plaintiff in order to establish negligence. Without these being established, negligence cannot be proven. With the first two, duty of care and breach of care, she would have to prove that CARDWARE had a duty of care for the plaintiff and that we breached that duty. Under duty of care, courts weight whether or on the act is commonplace, how the act was performed, and the seriousness of the injury. To do this, the courts use the reasonable person method, asking what a reasonable person would do in these same circumstances. This is based on how we judge people should act, not how they actually act. Next, with causation, she would have to prove that the breach caused her injuries. Under causation, proof must be shown that our actions were the cause (causation in fact). To find out if
there is causation in fact, according to Miller, R. L. (01/2012) one must ask “Did the injury occur
because of the defendant's act, or would it have occurred anyway? If an injury would not have occurred without the defendant's act, then there is causation in fact.” Additionally, the act and injury must be so closely connected that liability can be imposed, which is known a proximate cause. With this matter, Candie falling directly caused her injuries. Lastly, she would have to prove, under damages, that her injuries are legally recognizable. To prove this, she would have to prove injury or harm. In this case, her broken
