Editing Negligence (section)

==== United States ====
The United States generally recognizes four elements to a negligence action: duty, breach, proximate causation and injury. A [[plaintiff]] who makes a negligence claim must prove all four elements of negligence in order to win his or her case.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Healey |first1=Paul D. |date=1995 |title=Chicken Little at the Reference Desk: The Myth of Librarian Liability |url=http://heinonline.org/HOL/LandingPage?handle=hein.journals/llj87&div=38&id=&page= |journal=Law Library Journal |volume=87 |page=515 |access-date=22 September 2017}}</ref> Therefore, if it is highly unlikely that the plaintiff can prove one of the elements, the defendant may request judicial resolution early on, to prevent the case from going to a jury. This can be by way of a [[demurrer]], motion to dismiss, or motion for [[summary judgment]].<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Currie |first1=David P. |date=Autumn 1977 |title=Thoughts on Directed Verdicts and Summary Judgments |url=https://chicagounbound.uchicago.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=5912&context=journal_articles |journal=The University of Chicago Law Review |volume=45 |issue=1 |pages=72–79 |doi=10.2307/1599201 |jstor=1599201}}</ref>

The elements allow a defendant to test a plaintiff's accusations before trial, as well as providing a guide to the [[finder of fact]] at trial (the judge in a bench trial, or jury in a jury trial) to decide whether the defendant is or is not liable. Whether the case is resolved with or without trial again depends heavily on the particular facts of the case, and the ability of the parties to frame the issues to the court. The duty and causation elements in particular give the court the greatest opportunity to take the case from the jury, because they directly involve questions of policy.<ref name="mclauchlan">{{cite journal |last1=McLauchlan |first1=William P. |date=June 1977 |title=An Empirical Study of the Federal Summary Judgment Rule |journal=The Journal of Legal Studies |volume=6 |issue=2 |pages=427–459 |doi=10.1086/467581 |s2cid=153380489}}</ref> The court can find that regardless of any disputed facts, the case may be resolved as a matter of law from undisputed facts because as a matter of law the defendant cannot be legally responsible for the plaintiff's injury under a theory of negligence.<ref name="mclauchlan" />

On appeal, depending on the disposition of the case and the question on appeal, the court reviewing a trial court's determination that the defendant was negligent will analyze at least one of the elements of the cause of action to determine if it is properly supported by the facts and law. For example, in an appeal from a final judgment after a jury verdict, the appellate court will review the record to verify that the jury was properly instructed on each contested element, and that the record shows sufficient evidence for the jury's findings. On an appeal from a dismissal or judgment against the plaintiff without trial, the court will review ''[[De novo review|de novo]]'' whether the court below properly found that the plaintiff could not prove any or all of his or her case.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Hofer |first1=Ronald R. |date=1990 |title=Standards of Review – Looking beyond the Labels |url=http://heinonline.org/HOL/LandingPage?handle=hein.journals/marqlr74&div=14&id=&page= |journal=Marquette Law Review |volume=74 |access-date=22 September 2017}}</ref>