Also known as: legal causes
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A causal sequence linking an actor's tortious conduct to an invasion of a legally protected interest of another that renders the actor legally responsible for the resulting harm unless a defense applies. The sequence must satisfy both cause-in-fact requirements and the additional limits that keep liability within the scope of the risks that made the conduct tortious.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Luke Latham, a building owner, failed to repair a known loose handrail despite repeated complaints. Layla Lane, a tenant, grabbed the rail during a power outage and fell, suffering burns from a chemical she carried. The failure to repair placed Luke under a duty to conduct himself differently, and his omission was a legal cause of Layla's injuries, exposing him to liability.
Landon Long operated a ship-repair yard that sent metallic dust and noise across a narrow inlet onto Logan Lane's waterfront home. After complaints, Landon added equipment that increased the dust without enclosures. The operations were a legal cause of the invasion of Logan's protected interest in the use and enjoyment of her land, making Landon responsible absent a defense.
Lena Lawson, a lab supervisor, rushed an equipment check and overlooked a torn safety glove. Luis Lopez, a student, used the glove during an experiment, then fell on darkened stairs when a loose handrail detached, causing chemical burns. Lena's conduct as the actor raised the question whether it subjected her to liability toward Luis because it was a legal cause of his injury.
Liberty Trust delayed repairs on a known gas leak beneath a residential block. During a permitted street festival, a food-truck operator illegally connected a grill, triggering an explosion intensified by the leak that injured a nearby resident. The trust's conduct satisfied the element requiring that the defendant's conduct be a legal cause of the harm to the plaintiff.
Lunar Dynamics security personnel intentionally blocked all exits from a storage area after a visitor entered without authorization. The visitor remained trapped for hours until discovered. The personnel's act, done with intent to confine, was the legal cause of the confinement even though the barriers operated indirectly through the layout of the facility.
Linden Bank failed to update a title search before a real-estate closing as required by local custom. A lien recorded days earlier went undetected, leading to foreclosure and loss of the buyer's equity. The bank's conduct met the condition that the actor's conduct be a legal cause of the injury, rendering the bank subject to liability.
The plaintiff must show both that the defendant's conduct was a cause in fact of the harm and that the harm fell within the scope of the risks that made the conduct tortious. Legal cause therefore combines the but-for or substantial-factor test with limits on the chain of responsibility. Without both elements, the defendant is not held liable even if harm occurred.
Supporting sources
…resort to a court of equity in a case like this is that the remedy which the law gives is inadequate. If the plaintiff has no legal cause of action, the suit necessarily fails. Levy v. Walker , L.R. 10 Ch. D. 436, 449. There is nothing in the situation of the parties which can estop the defendant from saying so. Fifth:…
…liability for battery is given in 1 Restatement, Torts, 29, § 13, as: “An act which, directly or indirectly, is the legal cause of a harmful contact with another’s person makes the actor liable to the other, if “(a) the act is done with the intention of bringing about a harmful or offensive contact or an…
…formerly equitable action is triable to a jury simply because it is brought on behalf of a class, but only that a historically legal cause
…the resulting discovery of evidence. This is a remarkable proposition: The mere existence of a warrant not only gives an officer legal cause
…and reliability, we are forced to confront the problem of increasingly lengthy delays in capital cases. Ultimately, though these legal causes
Cause in fact asks whether the harm would have occurred without the defendant's conduct. Legal cause adds the further requirement that the actual result be sufficiently similar to the result risked by the tortious conduct that the law may fairly impose responsibility. An event may be a factual cause yet fall outside legal cause if an extraordinary intervening force breaks the chain.
Supporting sources
The client must prove that the lawyer's negligence was both a factual cause and a legal cause of the client's loss. This requires showing that proper performance would probably have avoided the adverse outcome and that the loss was within the scope of risks created by the negligent omission. A mere breach without this causal link does not create liability.
Supporting sources
No. An intervening act severs legal cause only if it is extraordinary and not a normal incident of the risk created by the defendant's negligence. When the defendant's conduct creates a risk that third-party misuse will occur in the precise setting where harm materializes, the intervening act remains within the scope of liability.
Supporting sources