If you are filing a lawsuit against someone after an injury in a car accident, slip and fall, or another type of accident, there are many legal terms you might hear from your attorney. One of those terms is causation, and without this component, it can be difficult to hold someone liable for your damages.
Causation is at the crux of all personal injury cases. Unlike criminal law, where the defendant must be proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, personal injury law requires establishing causation as one of the four elements of negligence.
Understanding what it means and how to relate to it in your specific personal injury case can help you see how your attorney will use this legal term to prove negligence. If successful, this will help you get the winning settlement or verdict you need to recover your losses.
Learn about Wagner Reese, LLP and the practice areas of Wagner Reese, LLP, and read on to find out what causation is and why it is instrumental to your case.
Definition of Legal Causation
Cornell Law School defines causation as a legal principle that establishes a direct link between one person’s actions and the resulting harm they cause to another person. Causation is a critical component for establishing liability. Causation further consists of cause in fact and proximate cause.
Cause in Fact, Factual Causation, or Actual Cause
Cause in fact, which is also referred to as actual cause or factual causation, refers to the facts of a case and its actual evidence. This is what should prove that a party is at fault for causing the harm suffered by the other person.
To establish causation by way of cause in fact, attorneys use the but-for test, which must prove that the harm suffered by the plaintiff would not have occurred “but for” the actions of the defendant.
Using the example of a car accident, if driver A was speeding and driving recklessly, then ran a red light and crashed into driver B, the but-for test asks the question, “Would this accident have happened if not for the dangerous behavior of driver A?” Clearly, if driver A had been driving in a reasonable and prudent manner, driver B would not have suffered extensive physical and psychological injuries, not to mention a slew of financial burdens.
Proximate Cause or Proximate Causation
While cause in fact relates to the facts of the case, proximate causation is the other side of the coin, relating to whether the consequences of the defendant’s behaviors were foreseeable. The conduct they exhibited must have directly caused the plaintiff’s injury and cannot be coincidental.
Proximate causation goes hand-in-hand with factual causation, and both must be proven to establish liability. With proximate causation, attorneys must determine whether the defendant knew their actions reasonably could and would cause harm.
The Role of Causation in Personal Injury Law
Establishing the causal relationship between the injuries sustained and the defendant’s behavior is the key to proving liability in a personal injury case. In order to prove liability, the four metrics of negligence must be present.
First, it must be shown that the defendant owed the plaintiff a duty of care. In the example of a car accident, all drivers owe one another the duty to drive safely and obey traffic laws. Next, when this duty has been established, it must be shown the defendant breached their duty.
The defendant’s act of speeding and running the red light in the previous example highlight dangerous driving behaviors. After the breach has been established, causation comes into play. Proving causation is key to holding that driver legally responsible in this causal chain of events that they initiated, where cause in fact submits the but-for causation test and legal cause factors into the case. The proximate must in tandem be proven, and then an attorney will move to the injuries and damages suffered by the victim.
Linking the actions of the defendant to the consequences is how causation is fundamental to the legal system, thus holding those accountable for the results of their actions.
Explanation of the “But-For” and Substantial Factor Tests
We’ve touched on the concept of “but for” which questions the actions of the defendant and whether or not the injury would have occurred without those actions. Another metric that is used is the substantial factor test, which is needed in complex cases that may have multiple causes.
Asking this question relates to cause in fact, though let’s say a car accident involved two drivers that each ran red lights in opposite directions. Using the premise of questioning if not X, then would Y have happened isn’t sufficient as it could suggest that neither driver caused the accident. Therefore, the substantial factor test is a better metric when there are more complex factors involved.
This test asks whether a defendant’s conduct was a substantial factor in causing harm. In the red light accident example above, each driver’s negligence played a role. This test allows for liability even if the injuries and damages would have occurred regardless due to other factors, as long as the conduct of the defendant played a significant role. It serves to prevent unjust outcomes in these cases, ensuring that a defendant is held accountable for their role, even if another factor was part of the equation.
Challenges in Proving Causation in Complex Cases
Causation is one of the most challenging aspects of establishing negligence and liability in personal injury cases. The evidence will have its own complexities, especially if there are pre-existing conditions. With multiple causes, attorneys face many hurdles in explaining causation and linking negligence to a specific injury.
Pre-Existing Conditions
With causal reasoning, a defendant’s legal team or insurance company will try to argue that when a plaintiff has a pre-existing condition, their injuries already existed. In such cases, it can be harder to prove that the accident was the causal component of the injury.
Multiple Potential Causes
In some cases, it’s easy to see a causal relation while in others, there may be multiple potential causes for the injuries sustained. Attorneys will need to isolate the defendant’s negligence as a leading cause of the injuries.
Multiple Liable Parties
Establishing causality is also more difficult when there are multiple liable parties involved. In truck accidents, the truck driver, the trucking company, cargo loaders, and even another driver in a separate vehicle could all have played a role in causing the plaintiff’s injuries.
Delayed Symptom Onset
The extent of one’s injuries from the accident may not have been obvious in the immediate aftermath. While common sense dictates seeking medical treatment after an accident, some people skip this step. However, even those who visit the doctor or hospital following a crash or other accident may not be diagnosed. It is possible for injuries to be missed, and for symptoms to be delayed.
With delayed symptoms, insurers love arguing that the injuries were caused by something unrelated to the accident. It is much more challenging for lawyers to prove that the incident in question caused the injuries, though it’s not impossible. Attorneys rely on expert testimony that can help connect the dots and bring the entire case into clearer focus.
How Wagner Reese, LLP Approaches Causation to Achieve Favorable Results
The causal contribution to an injury is one of the key factors in showing negligence and that the defendant is liable for damages caused. If you have been injured in an accident, your focus should be on getting better by following your medical treatments and keeping your medical appointments.
You shouldn’t be trying to grasp the concept of causation and finding ways to prove it on your own. It will only cause you more stress, and the insurance company of the at-fault party will have a team of litigators devoted to the sole purpose of either reducing your settlement or denying your claim.
With Wagner Reese, LLP, you get a solid advocate who provides a compassionate understanding of your plight while aggressively pursuing justice on your behalf. While some cases are straightforward, most of them are not, and the finger-pointing on who caused it and who is to blame will only serve to exhaust you if you handle it on your own.
Our attorneys work to investigate and present evidence that builds leverage in your case. With our resources, we are able to bring in expert witnesses who strengthen the case and tip the scales of justice in your favor.
The Importance of Understanding Causation for Legal Success
Although causation is the most difficult element of negligence to prove, it is the key to legal success in any case. Having an understanding of what is used to evaluate cause in terms of legal matters can help an attorney identify any gaps and allow them to seek appropriate evidence that proves who is liable. If you or a loved one has been injured in an accident someone else caused, contact Wagner Reese, LLP for legal advice.
