Reference no: EM133811651

Question

Adam is enjoying a family picnic in the park. Children are running around and playing on the swings and jungle gym. Adam's niece Josie, who's four years old, loves it when her Uncle Adam twirls her. Adam tells her there are too many kids around to twirl-he doesn't want to hit anyone-but she begs him and he gives in. Holding Josie under the armpits, Adam spins in a circle so that Josie's feet fly out in front of her. Unknown to Adam, there's a beehive in the tree next to them. The bees become agitated at the twirling and swarm out of the hive. Adam scoops Josie up in his arms and runs for shelter. People all around them are doing the same thing. A small boy gets stung and immediately goes into anaphylactic shock. His mother screams that he's allergic to bee stings. Someone calls 911. The boy is rushed to the hospital. He survives, but his family is left with hefty ambulance and hospital bills. They sue Adam for causing the boy's injuries. If the court follows the Cardozo rule, it may find that Adam:

Is liable for all reasonably foreseeable consequences of his neglect Owes a duty to the world at large Is liable for all consequences flowing directly from his actions no matter how unforeseeable is liable is he was the actual cause of the injury.