Also known as: but-for test · but for causation · but-for causation · sine qua non test · actual cause test
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A factual causation standard under which conduct qualifies as a cause of a result when the result would not have occurred in the absence of that conduct.
Bruce Baldwin stabbed a rival during a street fight. The victim lingered in intensive care for eighteen months before succumbing to complications from the wound. Prosecutors could not charge homicide under the year-and-a-day rule even though the stabbing satisfied but-for causation.
Brendan Burns filed an internal complaint alleging discrimination at his hospital employer. Three weeks later the hospital fired him. In his subsequent Title VII suit, the court examined whether the complaint was the but-for reason for the discharge rather than documented performance issues.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Brianna Burke purchased shares in a cable company after the firm and its suppliers issued misleading statements about revenue. When the truth emerged the stock fell sharply. Burke sued the suppliers, alleging their statements were a but-for cause of her losses.
Bradley Banks's apartment was searched after officers failed to knock and announce. Police recovered a firearm. The defense argued that the illegal manner of entry was a but-for cause of the seizure, requiring suppression of the evidence.
Byron Bishop was charged with unlawful possession of a sawed-off shotgun found during a traffic stop. The government had to prove that Bishop's conduct was a but-for cause of the weapon being in the vehicle at the moment of the stop.
Bianca Baker was terminated shortly after her employer learned she was transgender. She sued under Title VII, claiming her status was the but-for cause of the discharge rather than any legitimate business reason.
No. Multiple acts or omissions can each satisfy the but-for test when the harm would not have occurred in its actual manner without any one of them.
Supporting sources
An omission satisfies but-for causation when the defendant had a duty to act and the harmful result would not have occurred when and as it did if the defendant had performed that duty.
Supporting sources
The but-for test establishes factual causation as a threshold step. Only after factual causation is shown do courts consider whether additional limits such as remoteness or foreseeability preclude liability.
Supporting sources
Yes. An intervening act does not defeat but-for causation if the result would still not have occurred without the defendant's earlier conduct.
Supporting sources
…to mean that gender must be irrelevant to employment decisions. To construe the words "because of" as colloquial shorthand for "but-for causation," as does Price Waterhouse, is to misunderstand them. But-for causation is a hypothetical construct. In determining whether a particular factor was a but-for cause of a given event, we…