Hello, Kevin!
I see your point, but doesn't the burden of proof rest with the plaintiff in regard to whether or not the standard of care has been breached? If I remember correctly from my civil litigation class, the four elements necessary to establsich a cause of action are, 1) duty, 2) breach of duty, 3) proximate cause, and 4) damages. Standard of care would certainly go to the issue of whether or not a breach of duty has occurred.
It seems to me that a standard of reasonable care, while mostly subjective, would be a strong enough basis upon which to establish an affirmative defense to a claim of negligence. Am I correct?
All other things being equal, however, it probably is a good idea to have as much evidence as possible to defend against such contingencies. In today's litigious society, you just never know...
to post a reply:
login - or -
register