Also known as: assume a duty · assumed duty · assuming a duty · duty assumption
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A tort doctrine under which a person who voluntarily undertakes to render services or aid to another, even without any prior legal obligation, assumes a duty to exercise reasonable care in performing that undertaking. Liability arises if the actor fails to use reasonable care while the other remains in the actor's charge or if discontinuing the aid leaves the other in a worse position than before the undertaking began. The doctrine creates an exception to the general no-duty-to-act rule and applies when the actor takes charge of a helpless person or assumes a duty originally owed by another to a third person.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Anika Anand agreed to watch her neighbor's elderly parent after the parent fell. Anika took the parent into her home and began providing care. When a sudden storm made continued care impossible without fault on Anika's part, the court examined whether the non-occurrence of the storm was a basic assumption on which the undertaking rested.
Amelia Amari, a site supervisor, saw Austin Abbott collapse from heat exhaustion on scaffolding. She pulled him to a shaded platform, told others she would handle it, then left him unattended near an unguarded edge. Austin later rolled off and was injured. Amelia is liable because she voluntarily took charge of a helpless person and failed to exercise reasonable care while he remained in her charge.
No. The duty arises from the voluntary undertaking itself, even when the actor acts gratuitously or without any intent to assume legal responsibility. Once the actor takes charge of a helpless person or begins rendering protective services, reasonable care is required regardless of subjective intent.
Yes. When a contractor or agent undertakes to perform a duty originally owed by another to a third person, the undertaking creates an independent tort duty to the third person. The original duty-holder is not automatically released, and the assuming party may be liable for negligent performance of the assumed duty.
…company to furnish water at the city hydrants has in view a benefit to the public that is incidental rather than immediate, an assumption of duty to the city and not to its inhabitants. Such is the ruling of the Supreme Court of the United States ( German Alliance Ins. Co. v. Home Water Supply Co. , 226 U. S. 220). Such has been the…
…duty may be imposed by statute: automobile negligence case, follow the rules of the road; or by case law, or by volunteering to
…(1) negligence, (2) strict liability, (3) breach of implied warranty, (4) breach of express warranty, (5) breach of special assumed duty
Yes. Liability under the doctrine requires either failure to exercise reasonable care while the person remains in the actor's charge or discontinuing aid in a way that leaves the person worse off. If the actor merely returns the person to the original position without worsening it, no liability arises from the undertaking alone.
No. Reliance is one possible basis for liability under related provisions, but the core rule imposes liability when the actor takes charge of a helpless person and then fails to use reasonable care or leaves the person worse off, even without proof of reliance.