Home

Table of Contents

 Table of Forms   Law Journals-US  Authoritative Dictionary

 Courts

  Thesaurus
         

iLaw Dictionary

    USAConstitution Law
         

California

    BankruptcyCode.US
         

Law Dictionary

    iBusiness Center.US
         

Negligence-Common Law

    United States Law.US

US Codes

  State Codes

  Evidence

   Law Students-USL

 News

Entertainment

Medical Dictionaries

                                                 
      
A Legal and Business Portal-Home
   

   
                 
                 

 

iLaw Dictionary
California
Law Dictionary
 
Negligence-General-Common Law
(
Flowers v. Torrance)

 

Negligence-General-Common Law
(
Flowers v. Torrance)

[2] "[N]egligence is conduct which falls below the standard established by law for the protection of others against unreasonable risk of harm." (Rest.2d Torts, § 282.) Thus, as a general proposition one "is required to exercise the care that a person of ordinary prudence would exercise under the circumstances." fn. 2 (Polk v. City of Los Angeles (1945) 26 Cal.2d 519, 525 [159 P.2d 931]; Rowland v. Christian (1968) 69 Cal.2d 108 [70 Cal.Rptr. 97, 443 P.2d 561, 32 A.L.R.3d 496]; see Civ. Code, § 1714, subd. (a).) Because application of this principle is inherently situational, the amount of care deemed reasonable in any particular case will vary, while at the same time the standard of conduct itself remains constant, i.e., due care commensurate with the risk posed by the conduct taking into consideration all relevant circumstances. (Dalzell v. County of Los Angeles (1948) 88 Cal.App.2d 271, 276 [198 P.2d 554]; Lasater v. Oakland Scavenger Co. (1945) 71 Cal.App.2d 217, 221 [162 P.2d 486].) " 'There are no "degrees" of care, as a matter of law; there are only different amounts of care, as a matter of fact ....' [Citation.]" (Donnelly v. Southern Pacific Co. (1941) 18 Cal.2d 863, 871 [118 P.2d 465].) "Persons dealing with dangerous instrumentalities involving great risk of harm must exercise a greater amount of care than persons acting in less responsible capacities, but the former are no more negligent than the latter for failing to exercise the required care. [Citation.]" (Ibid.; cf. Polk v. City of Los Angeles, supra, 26 Cal.2d at p. 535 [applying the same measure of the standard of care to the former rule of contributory negligence].)
Flowers v. Torrance Memorial Hospital Medical Center (1994) 8 Cal.4th 992 , 35 Cal.Rptr.2d 685; 884  
 

spacer bar



Thomas - Legislative Information on the Internet |Check Your Credit Score
Directory of Medical Dictionaries: Table of Contents |
California Injury (Torts) Law
USA Entertainment.US | FederalCriminalProcedure.Com |starUnited Statea News
FederalCriminalProcedure.Com | iLaw Dictionary.ComLibrary of Congress
United States Law Consumer Law TITLE PAGE | USA Entertainment.US
iBusiness Center.US |
United States Law: Constitutional Law: Constitutions of  The World: TITLE PAGE
California Contracts Law.Com | California Injury (Torts) Law
Phone Directories From Around the World New | California Law Revision Commission 
California Civil Procedure.Com | Federal Civil Procedure.Com


™©

Copyright 2003 by  © - iLawDictionary.Com™©  All Rights Reserved