countervailing factors in California

12 California opinions name it 2 courts 1992–2025 4 in the last five years

The cases below were cited by California courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.

Followed or applied (8)

Case	Followed	Cited
Hansra v. Superior Courtgreen calctapp · 1992 · cited in 5 California opinions naming this issue, 1993–2025 2 sentences 2014(See Hansra v. Superior Court (1992) 7 Cal.App.4th 630, 646 [ 9 Cal.Rptr.2d 216 ] [“to say that a ‘special relationship’ exists [or does not exist] 462 is to say nothing other than the [Rowland] factors favoring imposition of a duty of care in particular circumstances outweigh [or do not outweigh] the countervailing factors . . .”]; Adams v. City of Fremont (1998) 68 Cal.App.4th 243, 285 [ 80 Cal.Rptr.2d 196 ] [“the question of duty must not ignore matters of policy regardless of whether the duty purportedly arises under the special relationship doctrine . . .”].) 3. 2014(See Hansra v. Superior Court (1992) 7 Cal.App.4th 630, 646 [ 9 Cal.Rptr.2d 216 ] [“to say that a ‘special relationship’ exists [or does not exist] 462 is to say nothing other than the [Rowland] factors favoring imposition of a duty of care in particular circumstances outweigh [or do not outweigh] the countervailing factors . . .”]; Adams v. City of Fremont (1998) 68 Cal.App.4th 243, 285 [ 80 Cal.Rptr.2d 196 ] [“the question of duty must not ignore matters of policy regardless of whether the duty purportedly arises under the special relationship doctrine . . .”].) 3.	3	5
Price v. E.I. DuPont De Nemours & Co.green del · 2011 · cited in 1 California opinions naming this issue, 2016–2016 1 sentence 2016DuPont de Nemours & Co. (Del. 2011) 26 A.3d 162, 170 [applying same reasoning to a “failure to warn” claim].) The Delaware Supreme Court “decline[d] to adopt ... the principle that absent a countervailing principle or policy” all actors have a “duty to exercise reasonable care when the actor’s conduct creates a risk of physical harm,” as stated by section 7 of the Restatement Third of Torts, Physical and Emotional Harm.	1	1
Delgado v. Trax Bar & Grillgreen cal · 2005 · cited in 1 California opinions naming this issue, 2014–2014 2 sentences 2014Assumption of a Duty Finally, plaintiffs argue AMI undertook to protect its employees’ future children from harmful exposures capable of causing birth defects by employing industrial hygienists to reduce workplace hazards and nurses to provide unspecified medical services, as well as by sending Khaled for a medical examination where he completed a questionnaire containing questions about his reproductive history. 3 We disagree. “ ‘[I]n order for liability to be imposed upon the actor’ ” under a negligent undertaking theory, “ ‘he must specifically have undertaken to perform the task that he is 2014Assumption of a Duty Finally, plaintiffs argue AMI undertook to protect its employees’ future children from harmful exposures capable of causing birth defects by employing industrial hygienists to reduce workplace hazards and nurses to provide unspecified medical services, as well as by sending Khaled for a medical examination where he completed a questionnaire containing questions about his reproductive history. 3 We disagree. “ ‘[I]n order for liability to be imposed upon the actor’ ” under a negligent undertaking theory, “ ‘he must specifically have undertaken to perform the task that he is	1	1
Adams v. City of Fremontgreen calctapp · 1999 · cited in 1 California opinions naming this issue, 2014–2014 2 sentences 2014(See Hansra v. Superior Court (1992) 7 Cal.App.4th 630, 646 [ 9 Cal.Rptr.2d 216 ] [“to say that a ‘special relationship’ exists [or does not exist] 462 is to say nothing other than the [Rowland] factors favoring imposition of a duty of care in particular circumstances outweigh [or do not outweigh] the countervailing factors . . .”]; Adams v. City of Fremont (1998) 68 Cal.App.4th 243, 285 [ 80 Cal.Rptr.2d 196 ] [“the question of duty must not ignore matters of policy regardless of whether the duty purportedly arises under the special relationship doctrine . . .”].) 3. 2014(See Hansra v. Superior Court (1992) 7 Cal.App.4th 630, 646 [ 9 Cal.Rptr.2d 216 ] [“to say that a ‘special relationship’ exists [or does not exist] 462 is to say nothing other than the [Rowland] factors favoring imposition of a duty of care in particular circumstances outweigh [or do not outweigh] the countervailing factors . . .”]; Adams v. City of Fremont (1998) 68 Cal.App.4th 243, 285 [ 80 Cal.Rptr.2d 196 ] [“the question of duty must not ignore matters of policy regardless of whether the duty purportedly arises under the special relationship doctrine . . .”].) 3.	1	1
Artiglio v. Corning Inc.green cal · 1998 · cited in 1 California opinions naming this issue, 2014–2014 2 sentences 2014Assumption of a Duty Finally, plaintiffs argue AMI undertook to protect its employees’ future children from harmful exposures capable of causing birth defects by employing industrial hygienists to reduce workplace hazards and nurses to provide unspecified medical services, as well as by sending Khaled for a medical examination where he completed a questionnaire containing questions about his reproductive history. 3 We disagree. “ ‘[I]n order for liability to be imposed upon the actor’ ” under a negligent undertaking theory, “ ‘he must specifically have undertaken to perform the task that he is 2014Assumption of a Duty Finally, plaintiffs argue AMI undertook to protect its employees’ future children from harmful exposures capable of causing birth defects by employing industrial hygienists to reduce workplace hazards and nurses to provide unspecified medical services, as well as by sending Khaled for a medical examination where he completed a questionnaire containing questions about his reproductive history. 3 We disagree. “ ‘[I]n order for liability to be imposed upon the actor’ ” under a negligent undertaking theory, “ ‘he must specifically have undertaken to perform the task that he is	1	1
People v. Jamesgreen calctapp · 2000 · cited in 1 California opinions naming this issue, 2006–2006 2 sentences 2006Evidence Code section 1108 admits evidence of prior offenses for any relevant purpose. ( People v. James (2000) 81 Cal. App.4th 1343, 1353, fn. 7 , 96 Cal.Rptr.2d 823 ; People v. Britt, supra, 104 Cal. App.4th at p. 505 , 128 Cal.Rptr.2d 290 .) Relevant evidence, which includes evidence relevant to the credibility of a witness, is evidence that has "any tendency in reason to prove or disprove any disputed fact that is of consequence to the determination of the action." (§ 210.) Here the evidence was relevant, if at all, to prove propensity to engage in sexual conduct. 2006Evidence Code section 1108 admits evidence of prior offenses for any relevant purpose. ( People v. James (2000) 81 Cal. App.4th 1343, 1353, fn. 7 , 96 Cal.Rptr.2d 823 ; People v. Britt, supra, 104 Cal. App.4th at p. 505 , 128 Cal.Rptr.2d 290 .) Relevant evidence, which includes evidence relevant to the credibility of a witness, is evidence that has "any tendency in reason to prove or disprove any disputed fact that is of consequence to the determination of the action." (§ 210.) Here the evidence was relevant, if at all, to prove propensity to engage in sexual conduct.	1	1
Lopez v. McDonald's Corp.green calctapp · 1987 · cited in 1 California opinions naming this issue, 1993–1993 2 sentences 1993No triable facts were presented that a special relationship existed and gave rise to a duty to control or warn. “[T]he relevant inquiry in any given case is not simply whether there exists some special relationship in the abstract. . . . [T]o say that a ‘special relationship’ exists is to say nothing other than the factors favoring imposition of a duty of care in particular circumstances outweigh the countervailing factors (one of which is that the harm was caused by a third person).” (Hansra v. Superior Court, supra, 7 Cal.App.4th 630, 646 .) Liability may not be premised on a defendant’s non 1993No triable facts were presented that a special relationship existed and gave rise to a duty to control or warn. “[T]he relevant inquiry in any given case is not simply whether there exists some special relationship in the abstract. . . . [T]o say that a ‘special relationship’ exists is to say nothing other than the factors favoring imposition of a duty of care in particular circumstances outweigh the countervailing factors (one of which is that the harm was caused by a third person).” (Hansra v. Superior Court, supra, 7 Cal.App.4th 630, 646 .) Liability may not be premised on a defendant’s non	1	1
Talbott v. Csakanygreen calctapp · 1988 · cited in 1 California opinions naming this issue, 1993–1993 2 sentences 1993No triable facts were presented that a special relationship existed and gave rise to a duty to control or warn. “[T]he relevant inquiry in any given case is not simply whether there exists some special relationship in the abstract. . . . [T]o say that a ‘special relationship’ exists is to say nothing other than the factors favoring imposition of a duty of care in particular circumstances outweigh the countervailing factors (one of which is that the harm was caused by a third person).” (Hansra v. Superior Court, supra, 7 Cal.App.4th 630, 646 .) Liability may not be premised on a defendant’s non 1993No triable facts were presented that a special relationship existed and gave rise to a duty to control or warn. “[T]he relevant inquiry in any given case is not simply whether there exists some special relationship in the abstract. . . . [T]o say that a ‘special relationship’ exists is to say nothing other than the factors favoring imposition of a duty of care in particular circumstances outweigh the countervailing factors (one of which is that the harm was caused by a third person).” (Hansra v. Superior Court, supra, 7 Cal.App.4th 630, 646 .) Liability may not be premised on a defendant’s non	1	1

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

Case	Negative	Cited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in California. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (6)

Case	Cited	Years
People v. Williams green cal · 1998 2 sentences 2025(People v. Williams (1998) 17 Cal.4th 148, 163 .) The trial court appropriately considered and weighed the present mitigating factors. 2023(Avila, supra, 57 Cal.App.5th at p. 1141.) In evaluating Pimentel’s mitigating circumstances against “factors intrinsic to the scheme, such as the nature and circumstances of the defendant’s present felonies and prior serious and/or violent felony convictions, and the particulars of his background, character, and prospects” (Williams, supra, 17 Cal.4th at p. 161 ), the trial court reasonably concluded that the countervailing factors outweighed the factors supporting a dismissal in furtherance of justice.	2	2023–2025
Rowland v. Christian red cal · 1968 2 sentences 2004Conclusion “[T]o say that a ‘special relationship’ exists [or does not exist] is to say nothing other than the factors favoring imposition of a duty of care in particular circumstances outweigh [or do not outweigh] the countervailing factors . . . .” (Hansra v. Superior Court (1992) 7 Cal.App.4th 630, 646 [ 9 Cal.Rptr.2d 216 ].) We believe that using another approach to duty analysis in this case—that is, the approach of analyzing various factors discussed in and often quoted from the opinion in Rowland v. Christian (1968) 69 Cal.2d 108 [ 70 Cal.Rptr. 97 , 443 P.2d 561 ]—would lead to the same 2004Conclusion “[T]o say that a ‘special relationship’ exists [or does not exist] is to say nothing other than the factors favoring imposition of a duty of care in particular circumstances outweigh [or do not outweigh] the countervailing factors . . . .” (Hansra v. Superior Court (1992) 7 Cal.App.4th 630, 646 [ 9 Cal.Rptr.2d 216 ].) We believe that using another approach to duty analysis in this case—that is, the approach of analyzing various factors discussed in and often quoted from the opinion in Rowland v. Christian (1968) 69 Cal.2d 108 [ 70 Cal.Rptr. 97 , 443 P.2d 561 ]—would lead to the same	2	2004–2004
People v. Mosley green calctapp · 1997 1 sentence 2025(People v. Mosley (1997) 53 Cal.App.4th 489, 496 .) We must presume the trial court found countervailing factors that neutralized the great weight of the mitigating circumstances, such that dismissal of the enhancements was not in furtherance of justice.	1	2025–2025
People v. Britt green calctapp · 2002 2 sentences 2006Evidence Code section 1108 admits evidence of prior offenses for any relevant purpose. ( People v. James (2000) 81 Cal. App.4th 1343, 1353, fn. 7 , 96 Cal.Rptr.2d 823 ; People v. Britt, supra, 104 Cal. App.4th at p. 505 , 128 Cal.Rptr.2d 290 .) Relevant evidence, which includes evidence relevant to the credibility of a witness, is evidence that has "any tendency in reason to prove or disprove any disputed fact that is of consequence to the determination of the action." (§ 210.) Here the evidence was relevant, if at all, to prove propensity to engage in sexual conduct. 2006Evidence Code section 1108 admits evidence of prior offenses for any relevant purpose. ( People v. James (2000) 81 Cal. App.4th 1343, 1353, fn. 7 , 96 Cal.Rptr.2d 823 ; People v. Britt, supra, 104 Cal. App.4th at p. 505 , 128 Cal.Rptr.2d 290 .) Relevant evidence, which includes evidence relevant to the credibility of a witness, is evidence that has "any tendency in reason to prove or disprove any disputed fact that is of consequence to the determination of the action." (§ 210.) Here the evidence was relevant, if at all, to prove propensity to engage in sexual conduct.	1	2006–2006
Huskinson & Brown, Limited Liability Partnership v. Wolf green cal · 2004 2 sentences 2004(Huskinson & Brown v. Wolf (2004) 32 Cal.4th 453 [ 9 Cal.Rptr.3d 693 , 84 P.3d 379 ]) 17 While Anton acted as both legal counsel for McIntosh and as his agent, the fact that McIntosh was represented by a member of the State Bar in connection with the transaction is itself sufficient to distinguish this case factually from either Cain or Emmons . 18 “A member shall not knowingly assist in, solicit, or induce any violation of these rules or the State Bar Act.” (CPRC, rule 1-120.) 19 Yet, McIntosh argues that this rule of imputation does not apply here because the issue of blameworthiness affects 2004(Huskinson & Brown v. Wolf (2004) 32 Cal.4th 453 [ 9 Cal.Rptr.3d 693 , 84 P.3d 379 ]) 17 While Anton acted as both legal counsel for McIntosh and as his agent, the fact that McIntosh was represented by a member of the State Bar in connection with the transaction is itself sufficient to distinguish this case factually from either Cain or Emmons . 18 “A member shall not knowingly assist in, solicit, or induce any violation of these rules or the State Bar Act.” (CPRC, rule 1-120.) 19 Yet, McIntosh argues that this rule of imputation does not apply here because the issue of blameworthiness affects	1	2004–2004
Davidson v. City of Westminster green cal · 1982 1 sentence 1992(Davidson v. City of Westminster, supra, 32 Cal.3d at p. 203 ; accord Nally v. Grace Community Church, supra, 47 Cal.3d at pp. 293, 296.) In other words, to say that a “special relationship” exists is to say nothing other than the factors favoring imposition of a duty of care in particular circumstances outweigh the countervailing factors (one of which is that the harm was caused by a third person).	1	1992–1992

Where else courts name it

TX 52 (1880–2025) CA 12 (1992–2025) NY 11 (1945–2016) PA 9 (1926–2019) MD 8 (1997–2015) OR 7 (1912–2001) AL 7 (1982–2008) TN 6 (2009–2019) IL 5 (1978–2022) CT 4 (1996–2010) WA 4 (1981–1998) NJ 4 (1975–1999) GA 4 (2011–2020) NE 3 (1995–2004) AZ 3 (1983–2006) IN 3 (1882–1921) DC 3 (1989–2014) WY 3 (1987–1997) DE 2 (1986–2016) MO 2 (1965–1984) SD 2 (1992–2018) MA 2 (1979–1980) OH 2 (2005–2012)

Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check