A personal injury victim can file a compensation claim. However, you must prove that the defendant caused the injury before your case succeeds.
Proving a personal injury claim is not a walk in the park because you may need to show that the defendant’s acts were the proximate cause of the loss.
Then, that brings us to the thrust of this piece: “What is the proximate cause?” This article will dissect the meaning of this legal concept and its impact on your rights when someone injures you. To calculate compensation amounts and understand proximate cause better, speak to injury attorney Dennis Abrams.
Understanding Proximate Cause
A victim must prove some points to show a defendant is liable for their injury. The four crucial points you must establish are:
- A defendant had an obligation or duty of care, like duty motorists have to be safe on the road
- The defendant did not fulfill this lawful role
- Their failure caused your harm
- The harm caused damage
You must consider the actual and the proximate causes of the accident in your evaluation. In some situations, you need not distinguish between the two because the same action accounts for the actual and the proximate causes. But it is more complex in some other instances.
Let us explain the meaning of the two related concepts:
What Does Actual Cause Entail?
It is also known as “cause in fact.” It is the immediate and direct cause of a mishap. For instance, if you are walking across the road while a motorist stops at a red light and their vehicle suddenly enters the intersection and hits you, the car’s movement is the actual cause of the crash.
Nothing would have happened had the driver’s vehicle not moved into the intersection while you were strolling.
What Proximate Cause Connotes
Another name for proximate cause is “legal cause.” It is the primary or root cause of the accident, an incident that sets everything in motion.
In the example above, we observed that the vehicle’s movement is the actual cause of your accident. However, if a large truck pulled up behind the car, rear-ended it, and caused it to involuntarily move into the intersection before hitting you, the truck was the leading cause of the accident. Its failure to stop is the proximate cause of your accident.
The actual cause and the legal cause differ in this instance.
How to Prove Causation
You must prove that a defendant’s action caused your harm to receive maximum compensation when you make a personal injury claim. States adopt different techniques to determine if you can establish causation.
“Substantial Factor” Test
As the name implies, this test considers if a defendant’s actions really caused an injury to happen. It is a typical test that people use to determine the proximate cause.
For instance, suppose a motorist was over-speeding and weaving in and out of traffic to meet up with a crucial schedule after their phone alarm failed to go off. If the driver carelessly swerved into your lane and hit you, their negligent driving was the substantial factor in causing the crash. You can make a personal injury claim and establish a proximate cause.
However, you could not institute a product liability claim against the phone manufacturer, although the alarm’s failure to go off primarily set the chain of events leading to the accident in motion. The court will not consider it a substantial factor triggering the crash.
“But For” Test
The main issue under this test is whether the accident would have occurred if the defendant was not negligent. The authorities use this test to determine the legal or actual cause.
The defendant could be responsible for the consequential harm if their acts or omissions are the leading cause of the accident. However, if the incident would have happened anyway, they cannot be legally liable for it. This final part is why the test remains problematic.
Proximate and Foreseeability Cause
Foreseeability is another crucial concept to consider when assessing the cause of an accident. It means whether the defendant could have anticipated or foreseen the repercussions of their action. You cannot hold the defendant responsible for the injury if they could not foresee the consequences of their actions.
For instance, it is foreseeable that a speeding driver might hit another vehicle and cause injuries and property damage. However, if the motorist crashes into an apartment unexpectedly containing explosives, you cannot necessarily hold the driver liable for the damage the exploding building caused. There was no way the motorist could know that speeding would cause a building explosion.
Who to Sue in Multiple Accident Causes
It can be overwhelming for a victim to know who to hold liable where a crash’s actual and proximate causes differ. However, the reality is that you may pursue a claim for compensation against multiple parties. For instance, if a vehicle that entered the intersection you were crossing struck you, you could sue the motorist of that car.
If it becomes evident that a trucker rear-ended that vehicle and was the proximate cause of the mishap, you could also sue the trucker.
Conclusion
These issues are complex and can be overwhelming. It is advisable to interact with a reputable personal injury attorney. They may help you identify all the liable parties in your case and can demand fair compensation.
