{"id":425,"date":"2021-10-25T04:06:26","date_gmt":"2021-10-25T04:06:26","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\/?page_id=425"},"modified":"2022-05-02T21:32:12","modified_gmt":"2022-05-02T21:32:12","slug":"caci-430-causation-substantial-factor","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\/caci-430-causation-substantial-factor\/","title":{"rendered":"CACI 430 Causation: Substantial Factor"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<style type=\"text\/css\" data-created_by=\"avia_inline_auto\" id=\"style-css-av-ku5dytjf-7659a05eb6cc0f6c2c600012da2b7cfe\">\n#top .av-special-heading.av-ku5dytjf-7659a05eb6cc0f6c2c600012da2b7cfe{\npadding-bottom:10px;\n}\nbody .av-special-heading.av-ku5dytjf-7659a05eb6cc0f6c2c600012da2b7cfe .av-special-heading-tag .heading-char{\nfont-size:25px;\n}\n.av-special-heading.av-ku5dytjf-7659a05eb6cc0f6c2c600012da2b7cfe .av-subheading{\nfont-size:15px;\n}\n<\/style>\n<div  class='av-special-heading av-ku5dytjf-7659a05eb6cc0f6c2c600012da2b7cfe av-special-heading-h1 blockquote modern-quote  avia-builder-el-0  el_before_av_hr  avia-builder-el-first '><h1 class='av-special-heading-tag '  itemprop=\"headline\"  >CACI 430 Causation: Substantial Factor<\/h1><div class='av-subheading av-subheading_below'><p>California Civil Jury Instructions CACI<\/p>\n<\/div><div class=\"special-heading-border\"><div class=\"special-heading-inner-border\"><\/div><\/div><\/div>\n<div  class='hr av-av_hr-91d7ccd583a503147498e120fee2ff9b hr-default  avia-builder-el-1  el_after_av_heading  el_before_avia_sc_search '><span class='hr-inner '><span class=\"hr-inner-style\"><\/span><\/span><\/div>\n\n<style type=\"text\/css\" data-created_by=\"avia_inline_auto\" id=\"style-css-av-avia_sc_search-f7f83518637509acfac1c9900b84c1e7\">\n#top .avia_search_element.av-avia_sc_search-f7f83518637509acfac1c9900b84c1e7 .av_searchform_wrapper{\nborder-radius:0px 0px 0px 0px;\nborder-color:#edae44;\nbackground-color:#edae44;\n}\n#top .avia_search_element.av-avia_sc_search-f7f83518637509acfac1c9900b84c1e7 #s.av-input-field{\nborder-radius:0px 0px 0px 0px;\n}\n#top .avia_search_element.av-avia_sc_search-f7f83518637509acfac1c9900b84c1e7 #searchsubmit{\nborder-radius:0px 0px 0px 0px;\n}\n#top .avia_search_element.av-avia_sc_search-f7f83518637509acfac1c9900b84c1e7 .av_searchsubmit_wrapper{\nborder-radius:0px 0px 0px 0px;\n}\n.ajax_search_response.av-avia_sc_search-f7f83518637509acfac1c9900b84c1e7{\npadding:0px 0px 0px 0px;\nmargin:0px 0px 0px 0px;\n}\n<\/style>\n<div  class='avia_search_element av-avia_sc_search-f7f83518637509acfac1c9900b84c1e7  avia-builder-el-2  el_after_av_hr  el_before_av_textblock '><search><form action='https:\/\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\/' id='searchform_element' method='get' class='' data-element_id='av-avia_sc_search-f7f83518637509acfac1c9900b84c1e7' ><div class='av_searchform_wrapper'><input type='search' value='' id='s' name='s' placeholder='Search CACI' aria-label='Search CACI' class='av-input-field ' required \/><div class='av_searchsubmit_wrapper '><input type='submit' value='Find' id='searchsubmit' class='button ' title='View results on search page' aria-label='View results on search page' \/><\/div><input type='hidden' name='numberposts' value='8' \/><input type='hidden' name='post_type' value='page' \/><input type='hidden' name='results_hide_fields' value='post_titles,meta,image' \/><\/div><\/form><\/search><\/div>\n<section  class='av_textblock_section av-av_textblock-e878f05c31dff72941bf1e49a00d9ff5 '   itemscope=\"itemscope\" itemtype=\"https:\/\/schema.org\/CreativeWork\" ><div class='avia_textblock'  itemprop=\"text\" ><ul>\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\/\">CACI Jury Instructions Index<\/a><\/li>\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/caci-fillable-forms.crowdsourcelawyers.com\/\">App: CACI Jury Instructions Fillable Forms Word Format<\/a><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/div><\/section>\n<div  class='hr av-av_hr-91d7ccd583a503147498e120fee2ff9b hr-default  avia-builder-el-4  el_after_av_textblock  el_before_av_textblock '><span class='hr-inner '><span class=\"hr-inner-style\"><\/span><\/span><\/div>\n\n<style type=\"text\/css\" data-created_by=\"avia_inline_auto\" id=\"style-css-av-ku5dzzqi-29fd7b810a68307dca08721846afcfbc\">\n#top .av_textblock_section.av-ku5dzzqi-29fd7b810a68307dca08721846afcfbc .avia_textblock{\nfont-size:20px;\n}\n<\/style>\n<section  class='av_textblock_section av-ku5dzzqi-29fd7b810a68307dca08721846afcfbc '   itemscope=\"itemscope\" itemtype=\"https:\/\/schema.org\/CreativeWork\" ><div class='avia_textblock'  itemprop=\"text\" ><h2 class=\"SS_Banner\">430\u00a0Causation: Substantial Factor<\/h2>\n<hr \/>\n<p><span class=\"SS_bf\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_bf\">A substantial factor in causing harm is a factor that a reasonable person would consider to have contributed to the harm. It must be more than a remote or trivial factor. It does not have to be the only cause of the harm.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span class=\"SS_bf\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_bf\">[Conduct is not a substantial factor in causing harm if the same harm would have occurred without that conduct.] <br class=\"avia-permanent-lb\" \/><br class=\"avia-permanent-lb\" \/><\/span><\/p>\n<hr \/>\n<div class=\"SS_Note\">\n<h2 class=\"SS_HideShowSection SS_Expandable\"><\/h2>\n<div id=\"TRNotes_n_1\">\n<p><span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">New September 2003; Revised October 2004, June 2005, December 2005, December 2007, May 2018, May 2020, November 2020 <br class=\"avia-permanent-lb\" \/><br class=\"avia-permanent-lb\" \/><\/span><\/p>\n<hr \/>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\/\">Crowdsource Lawyers<\/a><\/p>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\">https:\/\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci<\/a><span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\"><br class=\"avia-permanent-lb\" \/><\/span><\/p>\n<hr \/>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"SS_Note\">\n<h2 class=\"SS_HideShowSection SS_Expandable\">Directions for Use<\/h2>\n<div id=\"TRNotes_n_2\">\n<p>As phrased, this definition of \u201csubstantial factor\u201d subsumes the \u201cbut for\u201d test of causation, that is, \u201cbut for\u201d the defendant\u2019s conduct, the plaintiff\u2019s harm would not have occurred. (<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">Mitchell v. Gonzales<\/span>\u00a0(1991) 54 Cal.3d 1041, 1052 [1 Cal.Rptr.2d 913, 819 P.2d 872]; see\u00a0Rest.2d Torts, \u00a7\u2009431.) The optional last sentence makes this explicit, and in some cases it may be error not to give this sentence. (See\u00a0<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">Soule v. GM Corp.<\/span>\u00a0(1994) 8 Cal.4th 548, 572\u2013573 [34 Cal.Rptr.2d 607, 882 P.2d 298];\u00a0Rest.2d Torts, \u00a7\u2009432(1).)<\/p>\n<p>\u201cConduct,\u201d in this context, refers to the culpable acts or omissions on which a claim of legal fault is based, e.g., negligence, product defect, breach of contract, or dangerous condition of public property. This is in contrast to an event that is not a culpable act but that happens to occur in the chain of causation, e.g., that the plaintiff\u2019s alarm clock failed to go off, causing her to be at the location of the accident at a time when she otherwise would not have been there. The reference to \u201cconduct\u201d may be changed as appropriate to the facts of the case.<\/p>\n<p>The \u201cbut for\u201d test of the last optional sentence does not apply to concurrent independent causes, which are multiple forces operating at the same time and independently, each of which would have been sufficient by itself to bring about the same harm. (<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">Viner v. Sweet<\/span>\u00a0(2003) 30 Cal.4th 1232, 1240 [135 Cal.Rptr.2d 629, 70 P.3d 1046];\u00a0<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">Barton v. Owen<\/span>\u00a0(1977) 71 Cal.App.3d 484, 503\u2013504 [139 Cal.Rptr. 494]; see\u00a0Rest.2d Torts, \u00a7\u2009432(2).) Accordingly, do not include the last sentence in a case involving concurrent independent causes. (See also\u00a0<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">Major v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co.<\/span>\u00a0(2017) 14 Cal.App.5th 1179, 1198 [222 Cal.Rptr.3d 563]\u00a0[court did not err in refusing to give last sentence of instruction in case involving exposure to carcinogens in cigarettes].)<\/p>\n<p>In cases of multiple (concurrent dependent) causes,\u00a0CACI No. 431,\u00a0<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">Causation: Multiple Causes,<\/span>\u00a0should also be given.<\/p>\n<p>A case in which the plaintiff\u2019s claim is based on disease resulting from asbestos exposure requires a different instruction. (<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">Rutherford v. Owens-Illinois, Inc.<\/span>\u00a0(1997) 16 Cal.4th 953, 977 [67 Cal.Rptr.2d 16, 941 P.2d 1203];\u00a0<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">Lopez v. The Hillshire Brands Co.<\/span>\u00a0(2019) 41 Cal.App.5th 679, 688 [254 Cal.Rptr.3d 377]\u00a0[citing previous discussion of issues related to asbestos cases in Directions for Use of this instruction and\u00a0CACI No. 435].) Give\u00a0CACI No. 435,\u00a0<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">Causation for Asbestos-Related Cancer Claims<\/span>, and do not give this instruction. (But see\u00a0<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">Petitpas v. Ford Motor Co.<\/span>\u00a0(2017) 13 Cal.App.5th 261, 298\u2013299 [220 Cal.Rptr.3d 185]\u00a0[not error to give both\u00a0CACI Nos. 430\u00a0and\u00a0435\u00a0in case with both product liability and premises liability defendants].) <br class=\"avia-permanent-lb\" \/><br class=\"avia-permanent-lb\" \/><\/p>\n<hr \/>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"SS_Note\">\n<h2 class=\"SS_HideShowSection SS_Expandable\">Sources and Authority<\/h2>\n<div id=\"TRNotes_n_3\">\n<p><span class=\"SS_ListLabel\">\u2022<\/span><span class=\"SS_ListItemContent\">\u201cThe test for joint tort liability is set forth in\u00a0section 431 of the Restatement of Torts 2d, which provides: \u2018The actor\u2019s negligent conduct is a legal cause of harm to another if (a) his conduct is a substantial factor in bringing about the harm, and, (b) there is no rule of law relieving the actor from liability because of the manner in which his negligence has resulted in the harm.\u2019 Section 431 correctly states California law as to the issue of causation in tort cases.\u201d (<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">Wilson v. Blue Cross of So. Cal.<\/span>\u00a0(1990) 222 Cal.App.3d 660, 671\u2013672 [271 Cal.Rptr. 876].)<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span class=\"SS_ListLabel\">\u2022<\/span><span class=\"SS_ListItemContent\">\u201cCalifornia has definitively adopted the substantial factor test of the Restatement Second of Torts for cause-in-fact determinations. Under that standard, a cause in fact is something that is a substantial factor in bringing about the injury. The substantial factor standard generally produces the same results as does the \u2018but for\u2019 rule of causation which states that a defendant\u2019s conduct is a cause of the injury if the injury would not have occurred \u2018but for\u2019 that conduct. The substantial factor standard, however, has been embraced as a clearer rule of causation\u2014one which subsumes the \u2018but for\u2019 test while reaching beyond it to satisfactorily address other situations, such as those involving independent or concurrent causes in fact.\u201d (<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">Rutherford, supra,<\/span>\u00a016 Cal.4th at pp. 968\u2013969, internal citations omitted.)<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span class=\"SS_ListLabel\">\u2022<\/span><span class=\"SS_ListItemContent\">\u201cThe term \u2018substantial factor\u2019 has not been judicially defined with specificity, and indeed it has been observed that it is \u2018neither possible nor desirable to reduce it to any lower terms.\u2019 This court has suggested that a force which plays only an \u2018infinitesimal\u2019 or \u2018theoretical\u2019 part in bringing about injury, damage, or loss is not a substantial factor. Undue emphasis should not be placed on the term \u2018substantial.\u2019 For example, the substantial factor standard, formulated to aid plaintiffs as a broader rule of causality than the \u2018but for\u2019 test, has been invoked by defendants whose conduct is clearly a \u2018but for\u2019 cause of plaintiff\u2019s injury but is nevertheless urged as an insubstantial contribution to the injury. Misused in this way, the substantial factor test \u2018undermines the principles of comparative negligence, under which a party is responsible for his or her share of negligence and the harm caused thereby.\u2019\u2009\u201d (<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">Rutherford, supra,<\/span>\u00a016 Cal.4th at pp. 968\u2013969, internal citations omitted.)<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span class=\"SS_ListLabel\">\u2022<\/span><span class=\"SS_ListItemContent\">\u201cThe substantial factor standard is a relatively broad one, requiring only that the contribution of the individual cause be more than negligible or theoretical. Thus, \u2018a force which plays only an \u201cinfinitesimal\u201d or \u201ctheoretical\u201d part in bringing about injury, damage, or loss is not a substantial factor\u2019, but a very minor force that does cause harm is a substantial factor. This rule honors the principle of comparative fault.\u201d (<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">Bockrath, supra,<\/span>\u00a021 Cal.4th at p. 79, internal citations omitted.)<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span class=\"SS_ListLabel\">\u2022<\/span><span class=\"SS_ListItemContent\">\u201c[G]iving\u00a0CACI No. 430, which states that a factor is not substantial when it is \u2018remote or trivial,\u2019 could be misleading in an asbestos case, where the long latency period necessitates exposures will have been several years earlier. Jury instructions therefore should not suggest that a long latency period, in which the exposure was temporally \u2018remote,\u2019 precludes an otherwise sufficient asbestos claim. \u2018\u2009\u201cRemote\u201d often connotes a time limitation. Nothing in\u00a0<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">Rutherford<\/span>\u00a0suggests such a limitation; indeed, asbestos cases are brought long after exposure due to the long-term latent nature of asbestos-related diseases.\u2019 It was not error for the court to give\u00a0CACI No. 435\u00a0alone instead of\u00a0CACI No. 430.\u201d (<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">Lopez, supra,<\/span>\u00a041 Cal.App.5th at p. 688, internal citation omitted.)<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span class=\"SS_ListLabel\">\u2022<\/span><span class=\"SS_ListItemContent\">\u201cThe text of\u00a0Restatement Torts second section 432\u00a0demonstrates how the \u2018substantial factor\u2019 test subsumes the traditional \u2018but for\u2019 test of causation. Subsection (1) of section 432 provides: \u2018Except as stated in Subsection (2), the actor\u2019s negligent conduct\u00a0<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">is not a substantial factor<\/span>\u00a0in bringing about harm to another\u00a0<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">if the harm would have been sustained even if the actor had not been negligent<\/span>.\u2019 \u2026 Subsection (2) states that if \u2018two forces are actively operating \u2026 and each of itself is sufficient to bring about harm to another, the actor\u2019s negligence may be found to be a substantial factor in bringing it about.\u2019\u2009\u201d (<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">Viner, supra,<\/span>\u00a030 Cal.4th at p. 1240, original italics.)<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span class=\"SS_ListLabel\">\u2022<\/span><span class=\"SS_ListItemContent\">\u201cBecause the \u2018substantial factor\u2019 test of causation subsumes the \u2018but for\u2019 test, the \u2018but for\u2019 test has been phrased in terms of \u2018substantial factor,\u2019 as follows, in the context, as here, of a combination of causes dependent on one another: A defendant\u2019s negligent conduct may combine with another factor to cause harm; if a defendant\u2019s negligence was a substantial factor in causing the plaintiff\u2019s harm, then the defendant is responsible for the harm; a defendant cannot avoid responsibility just because some other person, condition, or event was also a substantial factor in causing the plaintiff\u2019s harm; but conduct is not a substantial factor in causing harm if the same harm would have occurred without that conduct.\u201d (<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">Yanez v. Plummer<\/span>\u00a0(2013) 221 Cal.App.4th 180, 187 [164 Cal.Rptr.3d 309].)<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span class=\"SS_ListLabel\">\u2022<\/span><span class=\"SS_ListItemContent\">\u201cGiving\u00a0CACI No. 430\u00a0in its entirety also would have meant instructing the jury on the principle of \u2018but-for\u2019 causation. Although generally subsumed within the substantial factor test, \u2018the but-for test is inappropriate in cases when two forces are actively operating and each is sufficient to bring about the harm.\u2019\u2009\u2026\u2009\u2018If a plaintiff [or decedent] has developed a disease after having been exposed to multiple defendants\u2019 asbestos products, medical science [is] unable to determine which defendant\u2019s product included the specific fibers that caused the plaintiff\u2019s [or decedent\u2019s] disease.\u2019 A \u2018but-for\u2019 instruction is therefore inappropriate in the asbestos context, at least when there are multiple sources of exposure. (<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">Lopez, supra,<\/span>\u00a041 Cal.App.5th at p. 688, internal citations omitted.)<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span class=\"SS_ListLabel\">\u2022<\/span><span class=\"SS_ListItemContent\">\u201cThat the Use Notes caution against giving the more general\u00a0CACI No. 430\u00a0in a mesothelioma case, when the more specific instruction\u00a0CACI No. 435\u00a0is more applicable, does not support a conclusion that it was error to give both instructions.\u00a0CACI No. 430\u00a0is a correct statement of the law relating to substantial factor causation, even though, as\u00a0<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">Rutherford<\/span>\u00a0[<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">v. Owens-Illinois, Inc.<\/span>] noted, more specific instructions\u00a0<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">also<\/span>\u00a0must be given in a mesothelioma case. Because the more specific\u00a0CACI No. 435\u00a0also was given, we do not find that the trial court erred by giving both instructions.\u201d (<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">Petitpas, supra,<\/span>\u00a013 Cal.App.5th p. 299, original italics.)<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span class=\"SS_ListLabel\">\u2022<\/span><span class=\"SS_ListItemContent\">\u201cA tort is a legal cause of injury only when it is a substantial factor in producing the injury. If the external force of a vehicle accident was so severe that it would have caused identical injuries notwithstanding an abstract \u2018defect\u2019 in the vehicle\u2019s collision safety, the defect cannot be considered a substantial factor in bringing them about. [\u00b6] The general causation instruction given by the trial court correctly advised that plaintiff could not recover for a design defect unless it was a \u2018substantial factor\u2019 in producing plaintiff\u2019s \u2018enhanced\u2019 injuries. However, this instruction dealt only by \u2018negative implication\u2019 with [defendant]\u2019s theory that any such defect was not a \u2018substantial factor\u2019 in this case because this particular accident would have broken plaintiff\u2019s ankles in any event. As we have seen, [defendant] presented substantial evidence to that effect. [Defendant] was therefore entitled to its special instruction, and the trial court\u2019s refusal to give it was error.\u201d (<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">Soule, supra,<\/span>\u00a08 Cal.4th at p. 572\u2013573, original italics, footnote and internal citations omitted.)<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span class=\"SS_ListLabel\">\u2022<\/span><span class=\"SS_ListItemContent\">\u201cThe first element of legal cause is cause in fact\u2009\u2026\u2009. The \u2018but for\u2019 rule has traditionally been applied to determine cause in fact. The Restatement formula uses the term\u00a0<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">substantial factor<\/span>\u00a0\u2018to denote the fact that the defendant\u2019s conduct has such an effect in producing the harm as to lead reasonable men to regard it as a cause.\u2019\u2009\u201d (<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">Mayes v. Bryan<\/span>\u00a0(2006) 139 Cal.App.4th 1075, 1095 [44 Cal.Rptr.3d 14], internal citations omitted.)<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span class=\"SS_ListLabel\">\u2022<\/span><span class=\"SS_ListItemContent\">\u201cIf the accident would have happened anyway, whether the defendant was negligent or not, then his or her negligence was not a cause in fact, and of course cannot be the legal or responsible cause.\u201d (<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">Toste v. CalPortland Construction<\/span>\u00a0(2016) 245 Cal.App.4th 362, 370 [199 Cal.Rptr.3d 522].)<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span class=\"SS_ListLabel\">\u2022<\/span><span class=\"SS_ListItemContent\">\u201cWe have recognized that proximate cause has two aspects. \u2018\u2009\u201cOne is\u00a0<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">cause in fact<\/span>. An act is a cause in fact if it is a necessary antecedent of an event.\u201d\u2009\u2019 This is sometimes referred to as \u2018but-for\u2019 causation. In cases where concurrent independent causes contribute to an injury, we apply the \u2018substantial factor\u2019 test of the\u00a0Restatement Second of Torts, section 423, which subsumes traditional \u2018but for\u2019 causation. This case does not involve concurrent independent causes, so the \u2018but for\u2019 test governs questions of factual causation.\u201d (<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">State Dept. of State Hospitals v. Superior Court<\/span>\u00a0(2015) 61 Cal.4th 339, 354 [188 Cal.Rptr.3d 309, 349 P.3d 1013], original italics, footnote omitted.)<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span class=\"SS_ListLabel\">\u2022<\/span><span class=\"SS_ListItemContent\">\u201cThe second aspect of proximate cause \u2018focuses on public policy considerations. Because the purported [factual] causes of an event may be traced back to the dawn of humanity, the law has imposed additional \u201climitations on liability other than simple causality.\u201d [Citation.] \u201cThese additional limitations are related not only to the degree of connection between the conduct and the injury, but also with public policy.\u201d [Citation.] Thus, \u201cproximate cause \u2018is ordinarily concerned, not with the fact of causation, but with the various considerations of policy that limit an actor\u2019s responsibility for the consequences of his conduct.\u2019\u2009\u201d [Citation.]\u2019\u2009\u201d (<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">State Dept. of State Hospitals, supra,<\/span>\u00a061 Cal.4th at p. 353, internal citation omitted.)<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span class=\"SS_ListLabel\">\u2022<\/span><span class=\"SS_ListItemContent\">\u201cOn the issue \u2026 of causation, as on other issues essential to the cause of action for negligence, the plaintiff, in general, has the burden of proof. The plaintiff must introduce evidence which affords a reasonable basis for the conclusion that it is more likely than not that the conduct of the defendant was a cause in fact of the result. A mere possibility of such causation is not enough; and when the matter remains one of pure speculation or conjecture, or the probabilities are at best evenly balanced, it becomes the duty of the court to direct a verdict for the defendant.\u201d (<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">Leyva v. Garcia<\/span>\u00a0(2018) 20 Cal.App.5th 1095, 1104 [236 Cal.Rptr.3d 128].)<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span class=\"SS_ListLabel\">\u2022<\/span><span class=\"SS_ListItemContent\">\u201c\u2009\u2018Whether a defendant\u2019s conduct actually caused an injury is a question of fact \u2026 that is ordinarily for the jury\u2009\u2026\u2009.\u2019 \u2018[C]ausation in fact is ultimately a matter of probability and common sense: \u201c[A plaintiff] is not required to eliminate entirely all possibility that the defendant\u2019s conduct was not a cause. It is enough that he introduces evidence from which reasonable [persons] may conclude that it is more probable that the event was caused by the defendant than that it was not. The fact of causation is incapable of mathematical proof, since no [person] can say with absolute certainty what would have occurred if the defendant had acted otherwise. If, as a matter of ordinary experience, a particular act or omission might be expected to produce a particular result, and if that result has in fact followed, the conclusion may be justified that the causal relation exists. In drawing that conclusion, the triers of fact are permitted to draw upon ordinary human experience as to the probabilities of the case.\u201d\u2009\u2019 \u2026 \u2018\u2009\u201cA mere possibility of \u2026 causation is not enough; and when the matter remains one of pure speculation or conjecture, or the probabilities are at best evenly balanced, it becomes the duty of the court to direct a verdict for the defendant.\u201d\u2009\u2019\u2009\u201d (<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">Raven H. v. Gamette<\/span>\u00a0(2007) 157 Cal.App.4th 1017, 1029\u20131030 [68 Cal.Rptr.3d 897], internal citations omitted.)<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span class=\"SS_ListLabel\">\u2022<\/span><span class=\"SS_ListItemContent\">\u201cOrdinarily, proximate cause is a question of fact which cannot be decided as a matter of law from the allegations of a complaint.\u2009\u2026 Nevertheless, where the facts are such that the only reasonable conclusion is an absence of causation, the question is one of law, not of fact.\u201d (<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">Modisette v. Apple Inc.<\/span>\u00a0(2018) 30 Cal.App.5th 136, 152 [241 Cal.Rptr.3d 209].)<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span class=\"SS_ListLabel\">\u2022<\/span><span class=\"SS_ListItemContent\">\u201c[E]vidence of causation \u2018must rise to the level of a reasonable probability based upon competent testimony. [Citations.] \u201cA possible cause only becomes \u2018probable\u2019 when, in the absence of other reasonable causal explanations, it becomes more likely than not that the injury was a result of its action.\u201d [Citation.] The defendant\u2019s conduct is not the cause in fact of harm \u201c\u2009\u2018where the evidence indicates that there is less than a probability, i.e., a 50-50 possibility or a mere chance,\u2019\u2009\u201d that the harm would have ensued.\u2019\u2009\u201d (<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">Bowman v. Wyatt<\/span>\u00a0(2010) 186 Cal.App.4th 286, 312 [111 Cal.Rptr.3d 787].)<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span class=\"SS_ListLabel\">\u2022<\/span><span class=\"SS_ListItemContent\">\u201cHowever the test is phrased, causation in fact is ultimately a matter of probability and common sense.\u201d (<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">Osborn v. Irwin Memorial Blood Bank<\/span>\u00a0(1992) 5 Cal.App.4th 234, 253 [7 Cal.Rptr.2d 101], relying on\u00a0Rest.2d Torts, \u00a7\u2009433B, com. b.)<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span class=\"SS_ListLabel\">\u2022<\/span><span class=\"SS_ListItemContent\">\u201cAs a general matter, juries may decide issues of causation without hearing expert testimony. But \u2009\u2018[w]here the complexity of the causation issue is beyond common experience, expert testimony is required to establish causation.\u2019\u2009\u201d (<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">Webster v. Claremont Yoga<\/span>\u00a0(2018) 26 Cal.App.5th 284, 290 [236 Cal.Rptr.3d 802], internal citation omitted.)<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span class=\"SS_ListLabel\">\u2022<\/span><span class=\"SS_ListItemContent\">\u201cThe Supreme Court \u2026 set forth explicit guidelines for plaintiffs attempting to allege injury resulting from exposure to toxic materials: A plaintiff must \u2018allege that he was exposed to each of the toxic materials claimed to have caused a specific illness\u2019; \u2018identify each product that allegedly caused the injury\u2019; allege \u2018the toxins entered his body\u2019 \u2018as a result of the exposure\u2019; allege that \u2018he suffers from a specific illness, and that each toxin that entered his body was a substantial factor in bringing about, prolonging, or aggravating that illness\u2019; and, finally, allege that \u2018each toxin he absorbed was manufactured or supplied by a named defendant.\u2019\u2009\u201d (<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">Jones v. ConocoPhillips Co.<\/span>\u00a0(2011) 198 Cal.App.4th 1187, 1194 [130 Cal.Rptr.3d 571], quoting\u00a0<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">Bockrath, supra<\/span>, 21 Cal.4th at p. 80, footnote omitted.)<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span class=\"SS_ListLabel\">\u2022<\/span><span class=\"SS_ListItemContent\">\u201c[M]ultiple sufficient causes exist not only when there are two causes each of which is sufficient to cause the harm, but also when there are more than two causes, partial combinations of which are sufficient to cause the harm. As such, the trial court did not err in refusing to instruct the jury with the but-for test.\u201d (<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">Major<\/span>,\u00a0<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">supra<\/span>, 14 Cal.App.5th at p. 1200.) <br class=\"avia-permanent-lb\" \/><br class=\"avia-permanent-lb\" \/><\/span><\/p>\n<hr \/>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<h2 class=\"SS_Heading\"><span class=\"SS_bf\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_bf\"><span class=\"SS_ib\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_ib\">Secondary Sources<\/span><\/span><\/h2>\n<div>6 Witkin, Summary of California Law (11th ed. 2017) Torts, \u00a7\u00a7\u20091334\u20131341<\/div>\n<div>California Tort Guide (Cont.Ed.Bar 3d ed.) \u00a7\u00a7\u20091.13\u20131.15<\/div>\n<div>1 Levy et al.,\u00a0California Torts, Ch. 2,\u00a0<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">Causation,<\/span>\u00a0\u00a7\u20092.02\u00a0(Matthew Bender)<\/div>\n<div>4\u00a0California Trial Guide, Unit 90,\u00a0<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">Closing Argument,<\/span>\u00a0\u00a7\u200990.89\u00a0(Matthew Bender)<\/div>\n<div>California Products Liability Actions, Ch. 2,\u00a0<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">Liability for Defective Products,<\/span>\u00a0\u00a7\u20092.22,\u00a0Ch. 7,\u00a0<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">Proof,<\/span>\u00a0\u00a7\u20097.06\u00a0(Matthew Bender)<\/div>\n<div>33\u00a0California Forms of Pleading and Practice, Ch. 380,\u00a0<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">Negligence<\/span>, \u00a7\u2009380.71\u00a0(Matthew Bender)<\/div>\n<div>16\u00a0California Points and Authorities, Ch. 165,\u00a0<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">Negligence,<\/span>\u00a0\u00a7\u00a7\u2009165.260\u2013165.263\u00a0(Matthew Bender)<\/div>\n<div class=\"SS_Note\">\n<div id=\"TRNotes_n_3\"><\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div><\/section>\n<div  class='hr av-rvlyh-3572ae90233decd64dc883e90fca4138 hr-default  avia-builder-el-6  el_after_av_textblock  el_before_av_textblock '><span class='hr-inner '><span class=\"hr-inner-style\"><\/span><\/span><\/div>\n\n<style type=\"text\/css\" data-created_by=\"avia_inline_auto\" id=\"style-css-av-lafdl-d12bf1c46a3b5e7256f18727ea157137\">\n#top .av_textblock_section.av-lafdl-d12bf1c46a3b5e7256f18727ea157137 .avia_textblock{\nfont-size:22px;\n}\n<\/style>\n<section  class='av_textblock_section av-lafdl-d12bf1c46a3b5e7256f18727ea157137 '   itemscope=\"itemscope\" itemtype=\"https:\/\/schema.org\/CreativeWork\" ><div class='avia_textblock'  itemprop=\"text\" ><p><a href=\"https:\/\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\/\">CrowdSourceLawyers.com<\/a><\/p>\n<\/div><\/section>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"parent":0,"menu_order":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","template":"","meta":{"footnotes":""},"class_list":["post-425","page","type-page","status-publish","hentry"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.4 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>CACI 430 Causation: Substantial Factor - Judicial Council California Civil Jury Instructions CACI<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\/caci-430-causation-substantial-factor\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"CACI 430 Causation: Substantial Factor - Judicial Council California Civil Jury Instructions CACI\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\/caci-430-causation-substantial-factor\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Judicial Council California Civil Jury Instructions CACI\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2022-05-02T21:32:12+00:00\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"15 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\\\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\\\/caci-430-causation-substantial-factor\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\\\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\\\/caci-430-causation-substantial-factor\\\/\",\"name\":\"CACI 430 Causation: Substantial Factor - Judicial Council California Civil Jury Instructions CACI\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\\\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2021-10-25T04:06:26+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2022-05-02T21:32:12+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\\\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\\\/caci-430-causation-substantial-factor\\\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\\\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\\\/caci-430-causation-substantial-factor\\\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\\\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\\\/caci-430-causation-substantial-factor\\\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\\\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\\\/home\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"CACI 430 Causation: Substantial Factor\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\\\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\\\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\\\/\",\"name\":\"Judicial Council California Civil Jury Instructions CACI\",\"description\":\"California Civil Jury Instructions CACI site\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\\\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\\\/#organization\"},\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\\\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\\\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"CrowdSource Lawyers\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\\\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\\\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\\\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/2\\\/2021\\\/09\\\/CrowdSource-Logo.png\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\\\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/2\\\/2021\\\/09\\\/CrowdSource-Logo.png\",\"width\":453,\"height\":208,\"caption\":\"CrowdSource Lawyers\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\\\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"}}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"CACI 430 Causation: Substantial Factor - Judicial Council California Civil Jury Instructions CACI","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\/caci-430-causation-substantial-factor\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"CACI 430 Causation: Substantial Factor - Judicial Council California Civil Jury Instructions CACI","og_url":"https:\/\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\/caci-430-causation-substantial-factor\/","og_site_name":"Judicial Council California Civil Jury Instructions CACI","article_modified_time":"2022-05-02T21:32:12+00:00","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Est. reading time":"15 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\/caci-430-causation-substantial-factor\/","url":"https:\/\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\/caci-430-causation-substantial-factor\/","name":"CACI 430 Causation: Substantial Factor - Judicial Council California Civil Jury Instructions CACI","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\/#website"},"datePublished":"2021-10-25T04:06:26+00:00","dateModified":"2022-05-02T21:32:12+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\/caci-430-causation-substantial-factor\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\/caci-430-causation-substantial-factor\/"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\/caci-430-causation-substantial-factor\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\/home\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"CACI 430 Causation: Substantial Factor"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\/#website","url":"https:\/\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\/","name":"Judicial Council California Civil Jury Instructions CACI","description":"California Civil Jury Instructions CACI site","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\/#organization"},"potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\/#organization","name":"CrowdSource Lawyers","url":"https:\/\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/2\/2021\/09\/CrowdSource-Logo.png","contentUrl":"https:\/\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/2\/2021\/09\/CrowdSource-Logo.png","width":453,"height":208,"caption":"CrowdSource Lawyers"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"}}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/425","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/page"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=425"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/425\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":2937,"href":"https:\/\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/425\/revisions\/2937"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=425"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}