Proximate cause

Many personal injury cases have a negligence cause of action. In a negligence case, the plaintiff must prove that the breach of a duty owed by the defendant to the plaintiff was both the actual and proximate cause of the injuries sustained by the plaintiff.

Two distinct concepts are embraced by proximate cause: cause in fact and foreseeability. The doctrine of proximate cause establishes the line of legal causation and ultimately involves weighing human conduct and various policy considerations. Proximate cause cannot be satisfied by guess, speculation or mere conjecture. The evidence must ultimately show that the negligence was the proximate, and not simply the remote, cause of the injuries. The conclusion must be that the injury was a natural and probable result of the negligence.

To establish cause in fact in a negligence action, a person must show that the act or omission was a substantial factor in bringing about the injuries and, without it, the harm or injuries would not have occurred. This is a delicate determination.

A "producing cause" is an act that is a substantial factor which brings about a harm or injury and without which an injury would not have occurred. Proximate cause and producing cause are not the same. Foreseeability is an element of proximate cause but not for producing cause.

The proximate cause of an event causing harm or injury has been defined as ‘that cause which, in a natural and continuous sequence, unbroken by any new and independent cause, produces the injury, and without which the injury would not have occurred." When an action sets into motion a natural and unbroken chain of events leading directly and proximately to a reasonably foreseeable result or injury, then it is a proximate cause of that harm or injury.

Contact Corpus Christi personal injury attorney Scott Nelson if you or a loved one has been injured by negligence.