Also known as: circles of foreseeable risk · zone of danger · foreseeability circle
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
The scope of plaintiffs to whom a defendant owes a duty of care in negligence. A defendant is liable only for harm to persons situated within the range of reasonably foreseeable risk created by the defendant's conduct. Injury to a plaintiff outside that range does not give rise to liability even when the conduct is negligent and the harm occurs.
River Culinary's staff ignored repeated complaints about Frankie pacing and shouting near the restrooms. Earl entered solely to use the restroom and was attacked there by Frankie. Earl's position in the exact area of the known risk placed him inside the circle of foreseeable risk, so the policy limiting intervention to paying customers did not shield the restaurant from a duty to him.
Consolidated Rail's employees allowed a tank car to leak hazardous fumes near People Express's terminal building. The airline suffered economic losses when it had to evacuate and cancel flights. Because the terminal stood directly in the path of the foreseeable spread of fumes, the airline fell within the circle of foreseeable risk created by the leak.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
A driver struck a child crossing the street while the child's mother stood on the curb a short distance away. The mother saw the impact and suffered severe emotional distress. Her presence at the scene placed her inside the circle of foreseeable risk, allowing recovery for the emotional harm caused by witnessing the injury.
A defendant owes no duty to a plaintiff outside the circle even when the defendant failed to control a known risk-creating third party. The inquiry focuses on whether the plaintiff's position aligned with the specific and localized risk the defendant should have addressed. When the plaintiff is not in that position, summary judgment for the defendant is proper.
Supporting sources
No. The circle is determined by the location and nature of the known risk rather than by customer status alone. When the plaintiff is injured in the precise area where prior complaints identified a danger, the plaintiff remains inside the circle even without having made a purchase.
Supporting sources
Yes. When regulations require safety briefings for everyone near a hazard and the plaintiff is an invited spectator in that area, the plaintiff falls inside the circle. The regulation's purpose of protecting persons in that location supplies the standard of conduct the defendant must meet.
Supporting sources
…trauma caused by the defendant's negligence only if the plaintiff were present at the scene of the accident and were in the zone of danger, is an artificial and unrealistically restrictive barrier. We shall explain that the availability of a cause of action for emotional trauma should turn on the defendant's breach of a duty…