Torts Understanding Duty and Negligence in Law

In this episode, we explore key legal principles surrounding the duty to act reasonably and the evolving scope of negligence law. Highlights include:

1. Duty to Act Reasonably: A legal duty to act arises only under specific circumstances, creating potential liability in negligence cases.
2. Negligent Infliction of Emotional Distress (NIED): We discuss the shift from the "Zone of Danger" test to the broader Camper v. Minor standard, which allows plaintiffs to recover for emotional distress with serious injuries, even if they were not in immediate danger.
3. Duty to Unborn Children: The Miller v. Kirk case defines duty to unborn children, establishing viability as the threshold for legal recognition.
4. Wrongful Pregnancy and Birth Claims: These cases illustrate the complexities of damages, including medical costs, lost wages, and emotional distress, but limit recovery for child-rearing costs.
5. Wrongful Life Claims: Courts generally reject these claims, citing philosophical and legal challenges tied to the "void of non-existence."
6. Case Spotlights:
   • Jane Doe v. Linder: Examines negligence liability for property developers failing to secure residential access.
   • Ramsey v. Beavers: Expands NIED recovery by removing the zone of danger requirement.
   • Smith v. Gore: Outlines damages recoverable in wrongful pregnancy claims.

Finally, we break down the "balancing test" in negligence, weighing the probability and gravity of harm against the burden of preventing it, emphasizing its application across the cases discussed. This episode sheds light on how courts define and apply the concept of duty in negligence cases. Tune in to better understand these pivotal legal doctrines!

 Introductory Music for American Law Cafe. In Jazz Short by moodmode / Vlad Krotov.