guy is speeding at 2am in a residential area, racing to the hospital because his wife just

had a heart attack, and hits a small child walking on the side walk.
did he breach his duty to the child (using learned hand test - utility)
foreseeable plaintiffs goes under duty
----------
im confused at how to make a duty/breach rule
--------------------
I!" #$%&
legal duty of care -- a re'uirement that a person act toward others and the public with
watchfulness, attention, caution and prudence that a reasonable person in the
circumstances would. If a person(s actions do not meet this standard of care, then the
acts are considered negligent, and any damages resulting may be claimed in a lawsuit
for negligence.
I!" )* +,!"-
-%he calculus of negligence, or -and rule or -and formula, is a term coined by .udge
/earned -and and describes a process for determining whether a legal duty of care has
been breached
%o determine whether a legal duty of care has been breached one would use the -and
rule, which states that 0000000.
+1$ 2 34/
5ocial utility is the utility that accrues(accumulates) to more than one indi6idual and as
well as the satisfaction which is obtained by the society as a whole. husband wife
immunity to pro6e social utility. social utility of helping children
+$#,* #,7I*,58 how hard/burdensome it would ha6e to a6oid the situation...that
which is borne(held up, supported) with difficulty9 obligation9 onus(a difficult or
disagreeable obligation, task, burden, etc.)...! source of weight
----------------I!"------------------------
#I# :$& +,!"- -I5 #$%& %) %-, "-I/#;
%o determine whether there is a breach of a legal duty of care one would use the -and
rule, which states that the probability of harm multiplied by the magnitude of harm is
balanced against the defendant(s burden to ha6e acted differently to a6oid the harm and
where a high utility of the defendant(s action may lower his burden to ha6e acted
differently.
<hen speeding in a residential area, the probabilty of harm by losing control of the car is
foreseeable and probable which is why speed limits are enacted and are lower in
residential areas where children li6e. -itting a child on the sidewalk shows the
magnitude of harm is high because the child is a person the speed limit protects and the
child still suffered injury. :uy was racing to the hospital because his wife just had a heart
attack howe6er :uy could ha6e called an ambulance or just obeyed the speed limits in
order to a6oid the the harm to the child. :uy will argue there is a utility to helping his wife
since she just had a heart attack and could be on the brink of life or death and further he
had to help his wife due to their husband and wife relationship. =oreo6er :uy will argue
that it was 2 in the moring and that the probability of causing the harm would be lowered
since reasonably children are not out walking at that time.
%herefore, it is unlikely that :uy breached his duty of legal care to the child.
-------------
dont automatically talk about balancing(utility 6erse risk) or reasonableness.....facts will
tell you which way to go....if the defendant is ob6iously acting unreasonable then use
conduct falls below unreasonable standard of legal duty, howe6er if there is a reason to
to 'uestion due to circumstances use balancing.
(copy and past peoples breach from e4am).
where there is unreasonable conduct .courts will balanc the risk and benefits of the
conduct
a breach occurs when one subjects another to unreasonable harm unless the risk
outweighs the benefit...to determine def cond unreasonable the courts will balance the
risk and benefits of the conduct