Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Gipson v. Kasey

Arizona Supreme Court

Decided January 22, 2007No. CV-06-0100-PRPublished

1ConcurrenceHurwitz, Justice

¶ 33 The Court correctly applies our precedents in determining that Kasey owed Folio-will a duty of care. I write briefly to suggest that our analysis of duty might be aided in the future by adopting a different conceptual approach.

¶ 34 The Court’s analysis today and in our prior cases largely centers on determining whether we should impose a duty on the particular defendant before us. But, as the Court notes, Op. ¶ 24 n. 4, under the common law “every person is under a duty to avoid creating situations which pose an unreasonable risk of harm to others.” Ontiveros v. Borak, 136 Ariz. 500,…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Ontiveros v. BorakArizona Supreme Court · 1983
  2. Markowitz v. Arizona Parks BoardArizona Supreme Court · 1985
  3. Eleanor M. Stagl v. Delta Airlines, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1995
  4. Stanley v. McCarverArizona Supreme Court · 2004
  5. Keckonen v. RoblesCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1985

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API