Also known as: superseding duty doctrines · superseding cause
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A principle in tort law under which an intervening act or force by a third person or nature relieves an original negligent actor of liability for resulting harm. The principle applies when the intervention prevents the antecedent negligence from remaining a legal cause of the injury.
Summit Gas delayed repairs on a known leak beneath a residential block. Chase then attached a grill illegally to a utility line during a festival, triggering an explosion intensified by the leak that injured Marion. The court must decide whether Chase's act prevents Summit Gas from remaining liable for Marion's injuries.
Sky Hotels failed to repair a broken exterior light despite repeated complaints. Nina, a stranger, chose the dim lot for a carjacking of Dawn because it concealed her approach. The court must decide whether Nina's criminal act prevents the hotel from remaining liable for Dawn's injuries.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
The City of Alexandria installed an unanchored sculpture in a high-traffic museum atrium knowing school groups visited weekly. Isabel allowed her students to crowd and push against the sculpture, causing it to topple onto Hal. The court must decide whether Isabel's conduct prevents the city from remaining liable for Hal's injuries.
Birch Media sold unsecured glass bottles in an upper balcony despite warnings that intoxicated patrons jostled there. Henry, who entered undetected, dropped a bottle onto Norman below after a sudden storm. The court must decide whether Henry's act or the storm prevents Birch Media from remaining liable for Norman's injuries.
Maya drove through Nexa Systems' gate and across its courtyard to escape rising floodwaters that threatened her car. She destroyed trees and conduit during the crossing. The court must decide whether the flood prevents Maya from remaining liable for the property damage.
Rosa ignored staff warnings and stacked heavy boxes on unstable shelves above a sale rack. A toddler pulled a dress, dislodging the shelf so boxes fell and injured Malik. The court must decide whether the toddler's act prevents the store from remaining liable for Malik's injuries.
An intervening criminal act qualifies as a superseding cause when it is independent of and unforeseeable from the defendant's negligence. Repeated complaints and internal recognition that poor lighting increases crime risk show the act fell within the known hazard, so the act does not supersede liability.
Supporting sources
A teacher's decision to allow students to swarm an obviously unstable sculpture may be viewed as highly extraordinary when the museum posted signs and a barrier. That level of departure from ordinary care can constitute a superseding cause relieving the museum of liability.
Supporting sources
An unprecedented downburst that produces harm different in kind from the risk created by inadequate crowd barriers qualifies as a superseding cause. The storm's operation must also be extraordinary rather than normal for the location.
Supporting sources
The court weighs whether the illegal act was a normal incident of the risk created by the unrepaired leak in a crowded residential area during a permitted festival. If the leak remained a substantial factor in the intensified explosion, the hookup does not supersede liability.
Supporting sources