you guys are lifesavers!
another question for ya:
regarding proximate cause, my professor briefly went over foreseeability in regards to proximate cause and where it fits in. Do I understand the below concept correctly?
- Polemis rejected foresight being introduced at the causation stage and wanted foreseeability confined to the duty/breach determination
- Wagon Mound 1 rejected Polemis and thought that foreseeability should be factored into duty/breach as well as causation
Polemis - liable for injuries that wouldn't have happend had D not been negligent (direct injury = liability, but draws the line if direct cause was too remote).
Wagon Mound - Liable for injuries that were foreseeable, but not for unforeseeable injuries (forseeable injury - liability).
Cardozo - Liable for injuries caused to a plaintiff that was within a zone of danger, judge decides as a duty question rather than causation question (only owe a duty to foreseeable P)
Andrews - Liable for injuries caused to anyone within a proximate time / space, let jury decide.