Cited by

Robertson v. Sixpence Inns of Am., Inc.

To survive summary judgment, a plaintiff “need only present probable facts from which the causal relationship reasonably may be inferred.” –97 ¶ 50 (App. 2010) (quoting Robertson v. Sixpence Inns of Am., Inc.

Robertson v. Sixpence Inns of Am., Inc.

Inc., ¶ 12 (2021) (stating an act is the “proximate cause” of an event if it occurs “in a natural and continuous sequence, unbroken by any efficient intervening cause” (quoting Robertson v. Sixpence Inns of Am., Inc., )).

See Robertson v. Sixpence Inns of Am., Inc., ("Plaintiff need only present probable facts from which the causal relationship reasonably may be inferred."); ("An inference is a fact which may be presumed from the proof of the existence or non-existence of other facts."); cf. also Matsushita Elec.

“Proximate cause” exists if the alleged criminal act produced an injury or death “in a natural and continuous sequence, unbroken by any efficient intervening cause.” Torres, 252 Ariz. at 31 ¶ 12 (quoting Robertson v. Sixpence Inns of Am., Inc., ); –10 (1989).

To survive summary judgment, a “[p]laintiff need only present probable facts from which the causal relationship reasonably may be inferred.” Robertson v. Sixpence Inns of Am., Inc.

1 Courts have often blended these concepts under the shorthand term “proximate cause.” See, e.g., Robertson v. Sixpence Inns of Am., Inc.

Robertson v. Sixpence Inns of Am., Inc.

Robertson v. Sixpence Inns of Am., Inc.

“A superseding cause, sufficient to become the proximate cause of the final result and relieve defendant of liability for his original negligence, arises only when an intervening force was unforeseeable and may be described, with the benefit of hindsight, as extraordinary.” Robertson v. Sixpence Inns of Am., Inc.

¶10 The “proximate cause of an injury is that which, in a natural and continuous sequence, unbroken by any efficient intervening cause, produces an injury, and without which the injury would not have occurred.” Robertson v. Sixpence Inns of Am., Inc., (citation omitted).

¶16 A plaintiff must show that causation is probable, not merely speculative, see Robertson v. Sixpence Inns of Am., Inc., and the defendant’s negligence must be “a substantial factor in bringing about the harm,“ Thompson v. Better-Bilt Aluminum Prod.

Thus, the “proximate cause of an injury is that which, in a natural and continuous sequence, unbroken by any efficient intervening cause, produces an injury, and without which the injury would not have occurred.” Robertson v. Sixpence Inns of Am., Inc., (citation omitted).

(alteration in original) (footnote omitted) (internal citations omitted) ().

See, e.g., Robertson v. Sixpence Inns of Am., Inc., (recognizing that plaintiff cannot leave causation to jury's speculation); (noting that “causation must be shown to be [p]robable and not merely [p]ossible”).

“In a cause of action for negligence, plaintiff must show some reasonable connection between defendant’s act 5 SANTOS v. TROLLEY, et al. Decision of the Court or omission and plaintiff’s damages or injuries.” Robertson v. Sixpence Inns of America, Inc.

See Robertson v. Sixpence Inns of Amer., Inc., (holding that the trial court erred in granting summary judgment on issue of intervening and superseding cause).

See Robertson v. Sixpence Inns of Am., Inc., –45 (1990); Markowitz, 146 Ariz. at 356–57.

The plaintiff bears the burden of proof on the issue of proximate cause, which is described as a “natural and continuous sequence, unbroken by any efficient intervening cause, produces an injury, and without which the injury would not have occurred.” Robertson v. Sixpence Inns of Am., Inc.

Robertson v. Sixpence Inns of Am., Inc.

See Robertson v. Sixpence Inns of Am., Inc. , , 546, , 1047 (1990) ( "The [negligent] defendant's act or omission need not be a 'large' or 'abundant' cause of the injury; even if defendant's conduct contributes 'only a little' to plaintiff's damages, liability exists if the damages would not have occurred but for that conduct."

4 WILSON v. HUBER Decision of the Court ¶9 “The proximate cause of an injury is that which, in a natural and continuous sequence, unbroken by any efficient intervening cause, produces an injury, and without which the injury would not have occurred.” Robertson v. Sixpence Inns of Am., Inc., (citation omitted) (emphasis added).

See Robertson v. Sixpence Inns of Am., Inc.

“The proximate cause of an injury is that which, in a natural and continuous sequence, unbroken by any efficient intervening cause, produces an injury, and without which the injury would not have occurred.” Robertson v. Sixpence Inns of Am., Inc., (internal quotations omitted).