Proximate Cause: Definitions & Examples (2024)

Establishing proximate cause is key to many legal cases, particularly personal injury lawsuits where you need to prove who caused your injury. But what is proximate cause in law terms? We explain what this term means and how it is significant in legal cases and insurance claims.

Proximate Cause Definition

Proximate cause is the event (or series of events) that directly leads to harm. In personal injury cases, the defendant’s deliberate or negligent actions must be closely related to the plaintiff’s injuries. If they aren’t, then the plaintiff cannot recover damages.

Sometimes it is easy to determine a proximate cause. For example, if Susan chooses to ignore a red light while driving and strikes Alex’s car in the intersection, then Susan’s actions are the proximate cause for injuries Alex suffers in the car accident.

Proximate Cause vs. Actual Cause

Our car accident example becomes more complicated if Susan is waiting at the red light when her car is struck by Dave failing to stop behind her. That impact then pushes her car into the intersection, where she strikes Alex’s car. In that case, Susan’s car actually struck Alex’s car, but the proximate cause of Alex’s injuries would be Dave’s actions. This is the difference between proximate cause (legal cause) vs. actual cause (also called cause in fact).

Actual cause and proximate cause have different contexts in spite of being similar sounding terms. Actual fact determines who or what caused an injury, but proximate cause determines who is liable for an injury.

Proximate Cause Examples

Let’s revisit our car accident example involving Susan, Alex, and Dave. Susan’s car strikes Alex’s car in an intersection after Dave negligently drives into Susan’s car. In this example, Susan’s car is the actual cause of the accident with Alex because her vehicle strikes his. However, Dave’s negligent driving is the proximate cause of the accident between Susan and Alex’s vehicles because it would not have occurred without his actions.

Proximate cause can also be found in product liability lawsuits where the defendant was not even present at the time of injury. Consider if Dave did not cause the accident by driving negligently, but instead a defect in his vehicle caused his brakes to fail as he drove up behind Susan’s car. In that case, the manufacturer of the defective vehicle part would instead be liable as their product was the proximate cause of the accident.

Premises liability cases also look to proximate cause rules. For example, consider store employees who spill liquid on the floor of a shop and fail to clean it up or warn shoppers. If a customer slips and falls due to the spill, then the store will be liable for the customer’s injuries because the spill was the proximate cause of the injury.

Proximate Cause Tests

The way you prove proximate cause in court varies depending upon the laws in the state. Here are the most commonly used tests and what they require.

Substantial factor test

Under this test, a plaintiff’s actions are considered the proximate cause for harm caused if their conduct played a substantial role in bringing about the harm. Actions that are found to be remote or only trivial factors in the harm will either be deemed not a proximate cause or assigned a lesser degree of fault.

For example, what if Dave had been held up on his drive by a group of jaywalking pedestrians. This causes him stress and he speeds to make up time, ultimately running into Susan’s vehicle when he fails to stop behind her vehicle. Dave’s driving was a substantial factor in the accident with Susan’s vehicle. The jaywalking pedestrians, although engaged in improper behavior that caused Dave stress, were probably not a substantial factor in the later accident.

“But for” test 

Simply put, this test requires a showing that the harm would not have occurred “but for” the actions of the defendant.

For example, let’s look back at our fictional car accident. Even though Alex’s car was actually struck by Susan’s, it would not have happened but for Dave’s failure to stop before he struck Susan’s car.

Foreseeable test

This test is largely out of favor, but is still used by some insurance companies when they review claims. It requires that harm suffered by a plaintiff be a foreseeable result of the defendant's actions. There is therefore no proximate cause for actions that cause unusual or unexpected injuries. States like Washington specifically exclude this test from jury instructions.

The standards for deciding proximate cause are laid out in jury instructions at trial. It can be very helpful to have a lawyer persuasively arguing your case before a jury to ensure they hear all of the facts that support your case. A lawyer will also be familiar with the applicable tests in your state. Fill out the form on this page to connect with a lawyer near you.