•  
  •  
 

St. Thomas Law Review

First Page

455

Document Type

Article

Abstract

Causation is among the more difficult concepts dealt with in the law of torts. "There is perhaps nothing in the entire field of law which has called forth more disagreement .... Nor, despite the manifold attempts which have been made to clarify the subject, is there yet any general agreement as to the best approach."' The law has, however, settled into at least a few basic concepts. There is general agreement that a defendant's act will not be regarded as a cause of a plaintiffs harm unless it is true that "but for" the defendant's conduct, the plaintiff would not have been injured. This test is often referred to as "cause-in-fact." For tort causation to be present, there must also be "proximate cause." This involves an inquiry into whether, notwithstanding the presence of cause-infact, there is some policy reason to cut off the putative defendant's liability. "Foreseeability" has emerged as a primary test of proximate cause. There is, however, another potential perspective on tort causation. Three of the world's major religions (Christianity, Judaism, and Islam) share a common belief in a Supreme Being who is causally active in human affairs. This article attempts to explore what a faith-based view of causation might look like, using Biblical texts as the basis for the analysis.

Download

Included in

Torts Commons

Share

COinS