California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from Isaacs v. Huntington Memorial Hospital, 211 Cal.Rptr. 356, 38 Cal.3d 112, 695 P.2d 653 (Cal. 1985):
It is clear that foreseeability is but one factor to be weighed in determining whether a landowner owes a duty in a particular case. "In this balancing process, foreseeability is an elastic factor. (2 Harper & James [Law of Torts (1956) ] 18.2, at p. 1026.) The degree of foreseeability necessary to warrant the finding of a duty will thus vary from case to case. For example, in cases where the burden of preventing future harm is great, a high degree of foreseeability may be required. [Citation.] On the other hand, in cases where there are strong policy reasons for preventing the harm, or the harm can be prevented by simple means, a lesser degree of foreseeability may be required." (Gomez v. Ticor (1983) 145 Cal.App.3d 622, 629-630, 193 Cal.Rptr. 600.) Thus, foreseeability is a somewhat flexible concept.
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.