Lesson 81: Famous Torts Cases

As part of our instructable on Case Studies in Torts Law, this lesson delves into some of the most famous torts cases which have shaped the landscape of tort law. Understanding these cases is crucial for navigating the complexities of torts law.

1. Palsgraf v. Long Island Railroad Co.

This landmark case is fundamental in understanding the concept of proximate cause in negligence. The case involved a chain of events at a railway station which led to Mrs. Palsgraf being injured.

Palsgraf v. Long Island Railroad Co.

In this case, Mrs. Palsgraf was standing on a platform of the Long Island Railroad. A man carrying a package tried to jump aboard a moving train and was assisted by two of the railroad's employees. The package, which contained fireworks, fell and exploded, causing scales at the other end of the platform to fall and injure Mrs. Palsgraf.

2. Donoghue v. Stevenson

This case laid the foundation for the modern concept of negligence and established the principle of duty of care. A woman became ill after consuming a ginger beer which contained a decomposed snail.

Donoghue v. Stevenson

Mrs. Donoghue drank a ginger beer bought for her by a friend. The beer contained a decomposed snail, which was unknown to her at the time of consumption. She subsequently fell ill and sued the manufacturer, Mr. Stevenson, for negligence.

3. Liebeck v. McDonald's Restaurants

Often referred to as the "hot coffee case," this case highlights the concept of strict liability and the importance of product safety.

Liebeck v. McDonald's Restaurants

Stella Liebeck suffered third-degree burns after spilling hot coffee purchased from a McDonald's drive-through. The coffee was served at a temperature far above what is considered safe for consumption. Liebeck sued for damages and was awarded a substantial sum, bringing attention to corporate responsibility for consumer safety.

4. Rylands v. Fletcher

This case established the doctrine of strict liability for abnormally dangerous activities. The case involved a reservoir constructed by Rylands which broke and flooded Fletcher's mine.

Rylands v. Fletcher

Rylands constructed a reservoir on his land, which later burst and flooded Fletcher's mine, causing considerable damage. The court held Rylands strictly liable for the damage regardless of the precautions taken.

Diagrams

To better understand the relationship between different tort law concepts and these famous cases, consider the following diagram:

graph TD; A["Torts Cases"] -->|Palsgraf v. LIRR| B["Proximate Cause"]; A -->|Donoghue v. Stevenson| C["Duty of Care"]; A -->|Liebeck v. McDonald's| D["Strict Liability"]; A -->|Rylands v. Fletcher| D;

Additional Resources

For further reading on key concepts and other important cases, check out the following lessons:

Next »