Helpful Hints
  • (1) You can search the entire content of Dean’s by phrase or by individual words. Just type your keywords into the search box and then pull down the search icon on the right and choose the option you need: search by word or by phrase or reset the content.
  • (2) Double click on a word in the content of a definition, and if the word is listed as a keyword in Dean’s, it will look that word up.
  • (3) You can use the search function to help jump the scrolling function. Simply type the first 2-3 letters into the search box then hit enter on your keyboard and the scroll will go to those Keywords that begin with those letters and allow you to scroll from there.

See also Strict liability (intervening acts), Negligence (independent intervening acts), and Intervening cause.

With respect to superseding intervening causes that might break the chain of proximate causation, the rule is established that it is not necessary that tortfeasors or concurrent forces act in concert, or that there be a joint operation or a union of act or intent, in order for the negligence of each to be regarded as the proximate cause of the injuries, thereby rendering all tortfeasors liable. See Cartwright v. Graves, 182 Tenn. 114, 184 S.W.2d 373, 381 (Tenn. 1944); Whitehurst v. Howell, 20 Tenn.App. 314, 98 S.W.2d 1071, 1081 (Tenn. 1936); Morris v. Bolling, 31 Tenn. App. 577, 218 S.W.2d 754, 758 (Tenn. App. 1949).

There is no requirement that a cause, to be regarded as the proximate cause of an injury, be the sole cause, the last act, or the one nearest to the injury, provided it is a substantial factor in producing the end result. Lancaster at 221; Kroger Co. at 626; Roberts at 871.

An intervening act, which is a normal response created by negligence, is not a superseding, intervening cause so as to relieve the original ...

Register or login to access full content