top of page
Asian Institute of Research, Journal Publication, Journal Academics, Education Journal, Asian Institute
Asian Institute of Research, Journal Publication, Journal Academics, Education Journal, Asian Institute

Education Quarterly Reviews

ISSN 2621-5799

asia institute of research, journal of education, education journal, education quarterly reviews, education publication, education call for papers
asia institute of research, journal of education, education journal, education quarterly reviews, education publication, education call for papers
asia institute of research, journal of education, education journal, education quarterly reviews, education publication, education call for papers
asia institute of research, journal of education, education journal, education quarterly reviews, education publication, education call for papers
open access

Published: 01 March 2023

A Teaching Note on Negligence: Palsgraf Revisited

Richard J. Hunter. Jr, John H. Shannon, Henry J. Amoroso

Seton Hall University, University of Tusla

asia institute of research, journal of education, education journal, education quarterly reviews, education publication, education call for papers
pdf download

Download Full-Text Pdf



Pages: 436-451

Keywords: Negligence, Respondent Superior, Duty of Due Care, Causation, Compensatory Damages, Punitive Damages, Superseding Cause, Contributory and Comparative Negligence


The case of Palsgraf v. Long Island Railroad (1928) provides an opportunity to engage students in a study of the cause of action termed negligence. The article explores issues relating to proof of negligence, defenses to negligence, and more directly, to the views of two American jurists, Benjamin Cardozo and William Andrews, relating to the issues of duty and causation—critical elements of proof.


  1. Adar, Y. & Perry, R. (2022). Negligence without harm. Georgetown Law Journal, 111: 187-235.

  2. Ahmed, R. (2021). The standard of the reasonable person in determining negligence - comparative conclusions. African Journals (On Line), 24(1),

  3. Alan L. Frank Law Assocs., P.C. v. Ooo Rm Invest. 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 142771 (2021). United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York.

  4. American Board of Professional Liability Attorneys (ABPLA). What is malpractice., (accessed February 6, 2023).

  5. Annitto v. Smithtown Cent. Sch. Dist. 210 A.D. 3d 615 (2022). Supreme Court of New York, Appellate Division, Second Department.

  6. Bal, B.S. (2009). An introduction to medical malpractice in the United States. Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research, 467: 339-347.

  7. Bar-Gill & Ben-Shahar (2003). The uneasy case for comparative negligence. American Law and Economics Review, 5(2): 433-469.

  8. Barron, M.H. (1999). Who’s an independent contractor? Who’s an employee? The Labor Lawyer, 14(3): 457-473.

  9. Binder, D. (1996). Act of God? Or act of man? A reappraisal of the act of God defense in tort law. Review of Litigation, 15: 1-79.

  10. Boothe-Perry, N.A. (2012). No laughing matter: The intersection of legal malpractice and professionalism. American University Journal of Gender, Social Policy and Law, 21: 1-37.

  11. Caldwell, J.R. & Baik, J.R. (2020). Negligence per se. Trial Advocacy, 39: 20-23.

  12. Colon v. Fource Hotel Props., LLC. 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 165956 (2011). United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida, Tampa Division.

  13. Coomer v. Kansas City Royals Baseball Corp. 437 S.W. 3d 184 (2014). Supreme Court of Missouri.

  14. Coyoy v. Corecivic, Inc. 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 234676 (2022). United States District Court for the Western District of Texas, San Antonio Division.

  15. Crane v. Weber. 211 Wisc. 294 (1933). Supreme Court of Wisconsin.

  16. Crews & Pasquera (2017). Palsgraf v. Long Island Railroad Co.: Foreseeability and personal injury law (October 6, 2017), (accessed February 8, 2023).

  17. Cunningham, L.A. (2010). Traditional versus economic analysis: Evidence from Cardozo and Posner torts opinions. Florida Law Review, 62: 667-720.

  18. Curran, C. (1992). The spread of the comparative negligence rule in the United States. International Review of Law and Economics, 12(3): 317-332.

  19. Dalley, P. (2016). Destroying the scope of employment. Washburn Law Journal, 55: 637-668.

  20. Davis, M.J. (1994). Individual and institutional responsibility: A vision for comparative fault in products liability. 39: 281-352.

  21. Deakin, S. (2018). Organizational torts: Vicarious liability versus non-delegable duty. The Cambridge Law Journal (March 2018), 77(1): 15-18.

  22. Dratler, J. (2009). Palsgraf, principles of tort law, and the persistent need for common-law judgment in IP infringement cases. Akron Intellectual Property Journal, 23,


  24. Echeverry v. Jazz Casino Co., L.L.C. 988 F. 3d 221 (2021). United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.

  25. Ellis, J. (2022). What are the different types of tort damages? MyLaw Questions (December 30, 2022),

  26. Farrar v. Dillard’s Props. 2021 U.S. District LEXIS 202481 (2021). United States District Court for the District of New Mexico.

  27. Fasoyiro, L. (2009). Invoking the act of God defense. Environmental and Energy Law and Policy Journal, 3(2): 1-33.

  28. FedEx Home Delivery v. NLRB. 563 F/3d 492 (2009). United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.

  29. Fouse, M. (2022). Comparative negligence in South Dakota. (February 22, 2022),

  30. Geistfeld, M.A. (2021). Proximate cause untangled. Maryland Law Review, 80(2): 420-463.

  31. Goldberg, J.C.P. (2022). Torts in the American Law Institute. InThe American Law Institute: A centennial history: 1-27 (A.S. Gold & R.W. Gordon, eds),

  32. https:////

  33. Goldberg, J.C.P. & Zipursky, B.C. (2010). Torts as wrongs. Texas Law Review, 88: 917-986.

  34. Goss v. USA Cycling, Inc. 2022-Ohio-2500 (2022). Court of Appeals of Ohio, Eighth Appellate District, Cuyahoga County.

  35. Guelli, S.R. (1992). The status of assumption of risk in product liability in Ohio after Cremeans v. Willmar Henderson Mfg. Dayton Law Review, 18: 243-273.

  36. Hall, W.W. & Anderson, R.G. (2019). Standards of review in Texas. St. Mary’s Law Journal, 1099-1351.

  37. Harris, D. (2021). The rival rationales of vicarious liability. Florida State University Business Review, 20: 49-77.

  38. Healy. S. (2021). Forgotten legal history: The story behind Palsgraf v. Long Island Railroad Co. The Florida Bar,

  39. Hodge, S.D. (2021). The liability of health care providers to third parties injured by a patient. Pace Law Review, 41: 464-513.

  40. Holmes v. Health & Tennis Corp. of Am. 103 Ohio App. 3d 364 (1995). Court of Appeals of Ohio, First Appellate District, Hamilton County.

  41. Hunter, R.J. (2005). An insider’s guide to the legal liability of sports contest officials. Marquette Sports Law Review, 15(2): 369-414.

  42. Hunter, R.J. & Amoroso, H.A. (2012). Damages for pain and suffering and emotional distress in products liability cases involving strict liability and negligence. Faulkner Law Review, 3(2): 277-302.

  43. Hunter, R.J. & Shannon, J.H. (2022). Assessing confidentiality in the lawyer-client relationship: A client perspective. Advances in Social Sciences Research Journal, 9(10): 418-430.

  44. Hunter, R.J., Shannon, J.H., & Amoroso, H.J. (2018). Products liability (Second ed.). South Orange, N.J.: Custom Publisher.

  45. Hunter, R.J., Shannon, J.H., Amoroso, H.A., & Lozada, H.R. (2017). A reprise of compensatory and general damages with a focus on punitive damages in products liability cases. International Journal of Business Management and Commerce, 2(1): 24-37.

  46. Hylton, K.N. (2022). Waivers. Boston University School of Law Paper No. 22-26 (September 20, 2022),

  47. Justia. Assumption of risk in personal injury cases,

  48.,; (accessed February 8, 2023).

  49. James v. Meow Media, Inc. 90 Fed. Supp. 798 (2000). United States District Court for the Western District of Kentucky.

  50. Kelly, T.L. (2020). The third restatement and the jurisprudential evolution of duty: Tracking the “duty war” in Palsgraf and beyond (with a focus on the influence of H.L.A. Hart). Drexel Law Review, 13: 87-141.

  51. Knobe, J. & Shapiro, S. (2021). Proximate cause explained. The University of Chicago Law Review, 88(1): 165-236.

  52. Kratzke, W.P. 92010). The case for a rule of modified comparative negligence. University of Missouri-Kansas City Law Review, 65(1): 15-29.

  53. Lawsuit Legal negligence explained simply, https// (accessed February 8, 2023).

  54. Leiser, A.W. (1956-1957). Respondeat superior- intentional torts as being within the scope of employment. Marquette Law Review, 40(3): 337-344.

  55. Levmore, S. (2019). Richard Posner, the decline of the common law, and the negligence principle. The University of Chicago Law Review 86: 1137-1156).

  56. Loo (R.V. (2020). The revival of respondeat superior and evolution of gatekeeper liability. Georgetown Law Journal, 109: 141-189.

  57. MacDougall, V.L. (2019). The jury verdict favored Helen Palsgraf: A critique of the Restatement (Third) PEH and foreseeability—“What does it all mean?” Oklahoma City Law Review, 43(1): 1-44.

  58. Mallen, R.E. (1979). Recognizing and defining legal malpractice. South Carolina Law Review, 30(2): 203-211.

  59. Maya, J.C. (2020). Respondeat superior and vicarious liability: An overview. (June 18, 2020),

  60. McDowell, B. (1985). Foreseeability in contract and tort: the problem of responsibility and remoteness. Case Western Reserve Law Review, 36: 286-325.

  61. McElhattan, D. (2021). The exception as the rule: Negligent hiring liability, structured uncertainty, and the rise of criminal background checks in the United States. Law and Social Inquiry, 47(1): 132-161.

  62. McCaw v. Ariz. Snowbowl Resort. 2022 Ariz. App. LEXIS 349 (2022). Court of Appeals of Arizona, Division One.

  63. Meadow, R. (2000). Contributory negligence: A question of fact or law? Association of Business Trial Lawyers (ABTL) Report, XXII(2): 5-6.

  64. Moughalian, G.O. )2021). Understanding the negligence question. Lincoln Memorial University Law Review, 9: 127-187.

  65. Munneke, G.A. & Davis, A.E. (1997/1998). The standard of care in legal malpractice: Do the model rules of professional conduct define it? Journal of the Legal Profession, 22: 33-84.

  66. M.M. v. Fargo Public Sch. Dist. No. 1. 2012 ND 79 (2012). Supreme Court of North Dakota.

  67. Nelson, W.E. (2018). Palsgraf v. Long Island RR: Its historical context. Touro Law Review, 34(1): 281-300.

  68. New York Times (1924). Bobb blast injures 13 in station crowd. New York Times (August 25, 1924),

  69. Nugent v. Quam. 82 S.D. 583 (1967). Supreme Court of North Dakota.

  70. Owen, D.G. (2000). Products liability: User misconduct defenses. South Carolina Law Review, 52: 1-80.

  71. Owen, D.G. (2007). The five elements of negligence. Hofstra Law Review, 35(4): 1671-1686.

  72. Palsgraf v. Long Island Railroad. 248 N.Y. 339 (1929). New York Court of Appeals.

  73. Paterick, T.E. (2022). Medical malpractice: An introduction to tort law. The Journal of Medical Practice Management, 37(4): 197-201.

  74. Rafii, R. (2023). Contributory and comparative negligence. Find Law (December 19, 2022), (accessed February 8, 2023).

  75. Ravenelle, A.J. 92019). “We’re not uber.” Control, autonomy, and entrepreneurship in the gig economy. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 34(4): 269-285.

  76. Ray, S.B. (2020). The law of rescue. California Law Review, 108: 619-677.

  77. Reid, W.H. (2004). Organizational liability: Beyond respondeat superior. Journal of Psychiatric Practice, 10(4),


  79. Restatement (Second) of Torts, Section 443 (1965). Affirmative Defense - Causation: Intentional Tort/Criminal Act as Superseding Cause.

  80. Restatement (Second) of Torts, Section 286 (1965). Negligence Per Se.

  81. Restatement (Second) of Torts, Section 908 (1965). Punitive Damages.

  82. Sage, W.M., Boothman, R.C., & Gallagher, T.H. (2020). Another medical malpractice crisis? Try something different. Law and Medicine (September 17, 2020), 324(14): 1395-1396,

  83. Sandgrund, R.M. (2018). Inherently dangerous and ultrahazardous activities. Colorado Lawyer (Colorado Bar Association) (February 2018), 47: 50-56.

  84. Santayana, F. (2019). Vicarious liability, non-delegable duties and the ‘intentional wrongdoing problem.” Torts Law Journal, 25: 152-183.

  85. Schmidt & Clark. What is respondeat superior? Characteristics and recoverable damages, (accessed February 8, 2023).

  86. Schwartz, V.E. (2010). Comparative negligence (5th ed. 2010). New Providence, N.J.: LexisNexis.

  87. Sergienko, G.S. (2006). Assumption of risk as a defense to negligence. Western State University Law Review, 34: 1-28.

  88. Sharkey, C.M. (2003). Punitive damages as societal damages. Yale Law Journal, 113: 347-453.

  89. Shouse Injury Law Group. The “reasonable person” standard- How does it work? (June 14, 2022), (accessed February 8, 2023).

  90. Sperino, S.F. (2020). The emerging statutory proximate cause doctrine. Nebraska Law Review, 99: 285-329.

  91. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Causation in the Law (October 3, 2019), (accessed February 8, 2023).

  92. Tikriti, A. (2023). Foreseeability and proximate cause in a personal injury case. All Law,

  93. Underhill, S.R., Schwartz, V.E., & Appel, C.E. (2022). Perspectives on the future of tort damages: The law should reflect reality. South Carolina Law Review, 74: 1-51.

  94. US Legal. Foreseeability law and legal definition,

  95. (accessed February 8, 2023).

  96. van Dongen, E. (2014). Contributory negligence: A historical and comparative study. Leiden, Netherlands: Brill Nijhoff.

  97. Wade, J.W. (1961). The place of assumption of risk in the law of negligence. Louisiana Law Review, 22: 5-16.

  98. White, C.H. (2002). No good deed goes unpunished: The case for reform of the rescue doctrine. Northwestern University Law Review, 97: 507-545.

  99. Wright, R.W. (2003). The grounds and extent of legal responsibility. San Diego Law Review, 40: 1425-1532.

bottom of page