A negligent undertaking claim can arise when a person or business voluntarily agrees to provide services and allegedly fails to exercise reasonable care while doing so. In some circumstances, that failure may lead to liability when the services were intended to help protect another person from harm.
Under California law, courts may examine what services the defendant undertook to provide, whether those services were connected to the protection of another person, and how the defendant performed them. The effect of the undertaking and any reliance on the services can also become important.
How Courts Identify the Undertaking
Courts may first examine whether the defendant actually undertook to provide particular services. The nature and extent of the services can help define the responsibilities associated with the undertaking.
The specific task assumed by the defendant can be especially important. California courts have recognized that the scope of a negligent undertaking depends on what the defendant actually agreed or undertook to do.
How the Purpose of the Services Matters
The services involved must have a connection to protecting another person from harm. Courts may examine what services were provided and whether the defendant should have recognized their importance to the protection of that person.
The circumstances surrounding the arrangement can help establish the purpose of the services. This may include the relationship between the parties, the responsibilities involved, and the role the defendant assumed.
How Courts Examine the Care Provided
Once an undertaking is identified, courts may examine how the defendant performed the services. A negligent undertaking claim can involve allegations that reasonable care was not exercised in carrying out the responsibilities that were assumed.
The analysis generally focuses on the particular undertaking rather than imposing responsibility for matters outside its scope. The defendant’s actions in performing the assumed services can therefore become central to the dispute.
How an Increased Risk of Harm Becomes Relevant
One basis for negligent undertaking liability can arise when a failure to exercise reasonable care increases the risk of harm. Courts may examine whether the defendant’s performance left the affected person exposed to a greater risk than existed without the undertaking.
The circumstances before and after the services were provided may become relevant to this analysis. Courts can consider how the defendant’s actions changed the situation and whether that change contributed to the harm.
How Reliance Can Affect the Claim
Reliance can also become important when another person depends on the defendant to perform the undertaking. Courts may examine whether the defendant’s services influenced the actions or decisions of the parties involved.
The nature of that reliance can vary depending on the circumstances. A claim may involve allegations that someone depended on the undertaking and suffered harm when the services were not performed with reasonable care.
Why Negligent Undertaking Claims Matter
Negligent undertaking claims can arise even when a defendant did not initially have a general obligation to provide the services at issue. Voluntarily assuming certain responsibilities can create questions about how those responsibilities were carried out.
Understanding these claims can help individuals and businesses recognize the significance of assuming responsibilities intended to protect others. The scope of the undertaking, the care provided, increased risk, reliance, and resulting harm can all become important considerations.
