How A School Official Has Breached Their Duty Of Care To Students
BREACH OF DUTY
A school official will have breached their duty of care to a student if they knew about an unsafe situation or condition and failed to take measures to address the situation. Supervising would consist of following the students around and watching over them to make certain they do not pick up any dangerous objects. As the students began to explore the beach, TEACHER LIED DOWN to RELAX in the SUN. LYING DOWN and RELAXING are the OPPOSITE of SUPERVISION. Therefore, TEACHER BREACHED his DUTY to SUPERVISE the PLAINTIFF.
3. ACTUAL CAUSE
An ACTUAL CAUSE is a cause that meets the requirements of the “BUT FOR” test. But for an ACT or OMISSION to act the damage would not have happened. Here, the facts indicate that, BUT FOR TEACHER'S OMISSION TO PROPERLY SUPERVISE JENNIFER, JENNIFER would not have roamed around the beach without supervision, thus leaving her in danger. Consequently, TEACHER'S OMISSION of SUPERVISION is the ACTUAL CAUSE of the STUDENT'S injury .
4. PROXIMATE CAUSE I (THE INJURY HAPPENS)
A PROXIMATE CAUSE is a cause that meets the test of FORESEEABILITY in a sequence of events. This prevents a person being liable for remote and unpredictable injuries or damages. Only reasonably foreseeable damages or injuries are …show more content…
A SEA URCHIN can cause a puncture wound which can be poisonous or lead to an infection from different types of bacteria, including sea bacteria. Because TEACHER was relaxing, he was not supervising the individual beach activities of the STUDENT. An UNSUPERVISED STUDENT CONTACTED a SEA URCHIN resulting in the student being injured. TEACHER did not use reasonable care to ensure the student wasn't injured. Hence, the OMISSION by TEACHER to FORESEE the SEA ANIMAL DANGER to the PLAINTIFF and take measures to prevent it was a PROXIMATE cause of the
A school official will have breached their duty of care to a student if they knew about an unsafe situation or condition and failed to take measures to address the situation. Supervising would consist of following the students around and watching over them to make certain they do not pick up any dangerous objects. As the students began to explore the beach, TEACHER LIED DOWN to RELAX in the SUN. LYING DOWN and RELAXING are the OPPOSITE of SUPERVISION. Therefore, TEACHER BREACHED his DUTY to SUPERVISE the PLAINTIFF.
3. ACTUAL CAUSE
An ACTUAL CAUSE is a cause that meets the requirements of the “BUT FOR” test. But for an ACT or OMISSION to act the damage would not have happened. Here, the facts indicate that, BUT FOR TEACHER'S OMISSION TO PROPERLY SUPERVISE JENNIFER, JENNIFER would not have roamed around the beach without supervision, thus leaving her in danger. Consequently, TEACHER'S OMISSION of SUPERVISION is the ACTUAL CAUSE of the STUDENT'S injury .
4. PROXIMATE CAUSE I (THE INJURY HAPPENS)
A PROXIMATE CAUSE is a cause that meets the test of FORESEEABILITY in a sequence of events. This prevents a person being liable for remote and unpredictable injuries or damages. Only reasonably foreseeable damages or injuries are …show more content…
A SEA URCHIN can cause a puncture wound which can be poisonous or lead to an infection from different types of bacteria, including sea bacteria. Because TEACHER was relaxing, he was not supervising the individual beach activities of the STUDENT. An UNSUPERVISED STUDENT CONTACTED a SEA URCHIN resulting in the student being injured. TEACHER did not use reasonable care to ensure the student wasn't injured. Hence, the OMISSION by TEACHER to FORESEE the SEA ANIMAL DANGER to the PLAINTIFF and take measures to prevent it was a PROXIMATE cause of the