Case Law Bonus Post: Bangs v. Kelly

Again, our understanding of this caselaw wouldn’t be especially aided by an outline. Definition of a few terms is necessary, however. First, what is a standard of care? You may remember that the Midlands Civil Code selections reference a “duty of care.” That’s a legal obligation to abide by a “standard of reasonable care.” If you owe someone a duty of care, you have an obligation to take reasonable care in performing actions that might harm them. “Determining the standard of care applicable at law” basically means fleshing out that rule- figuring out what someone taking reasonable care would have done in the particular circumstances of the case. Later the case law references “tortious conduct,” which basically means “conduct for which you can be sued.” In short, this case law says that in evaluating whether or not someone acted with reasonable care, we can consider physical and mental limitations of the person, both permanent and temporary. It’s a very intuitive idea if you think about it. For example, most people are being perfectly reasonably careful by driving to work; a blind person is not.