McAdoo
• Not only is the standard of care objective but issues of
knowledge are built right into the standard
Cordas
• Emergency is no different from any other situation with
standard of care. It just goes to the reasonable person who
would be in your situation
Roberts
• When it comes to disabilities you have to act like a reasonable
person with the same disability
Children, Insanity, Professional standard of care
Robinson v. Lindsay pg 166
Facts:
• DF (Anderson-age 13) was driving the DF’s (Lindsay)
snowmobile and pulling PL on an innertube. The PL’s thumb
was severed. It was reattached but not fully functional
• Jury ruled for DF
• Trial court erred in instructing the jury about the
standard of case so New Trial
•There is a special standard of care for children
• It deals with the capacity of the child, and this is to be
determined, ordinarily, by the age of the child.
• Reasonable careful child of the same age, intelligence,
maturity, training and experience
• Exception: When a child engages in inherently dangerous
activity held to adult standards
• New trial affirmed
Breunig v. American Family Ins. Co. pg 170 –Insanity
Facts:
• DF was driving when she spotted a white light that she
followed for 3 or 4 blocks. She heard a voice telling her that
God would take the wheel. when she saw the PL’s truck she
hit the gas so she could fly, striking the PL’s truck
• Jury for PL
•Policy basis:
• Where one of two innocent persons must suffer a loss it
should be borne by the one who occasioned it
• Compensate PL
• Induce those interested in the estate of the insane
person to restrain and control him
• Provide incentives to caretakers
