"But-For" test crim law - causation

(Study Tips, Dealing With Stress, Maintaining a Social Life, Financial Aid, Internships, Bar Exam, Careers in Law . . . )
User avatar
Posts: 253
Joined: Mon Mar 07, 2011 11:42 pm

"But-For" test crim law - causation

Postby IHaveLawyers » Thu Dec 08, 2011 4:43 pm

what "but-for" someones actions, the result might have still occurred?

User avatar
Posts: 3813
Joined: Thu May 12, 2011 2:28 pm

Re: "But-For" test crim law - causation

Postby TheFutureLawyer » Thu Dec 08, 2011 5:04 pm

IHaveLawyers wrote:what "but-for" someones actions, the result might have still occurred?

Uhh, hard to understand, but maybe this will help:

a. “But for” test fails to exclude remote candidates for legal responsibility
b. Issues of proximate causation generally arise when an intervening force exists, i.e., when some but-for causal agent comes into play after the defendant’s voluntary act or omission and before the social harm occurs.
(i) Three types of intervening causes:
1. Act of God
2. Act of an independent third party, which accelerates or aggravates the harm caused by the defendant, or which causes it to occur in an unexpected manner
3. Act or omission of the victim that assists in bringing about the outcome.

Return to “Forum for Law School Students”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 3 guests