How Negligence Lawsuits are Redefining 'Duty of Care'

Negligence lawsuits, civil actions filed when one party's failure to exercise reasonable care causes harm to another are a foundational aspect of legal accountability.

At their core, these cases require proving four key elements: a duty of care owed, a breach of that duty, causation linking the breach to the harm, and measurable damages.

Recent, high-profile cases across public safety, sports, and healthcare illustrate the widening circumstances under which organizations and individuals are being held responsible for failing in their duty of care.

Public Safety: Maine Mass Shooting Survivors Refile Suit Citing Army Negligence

In a profound example of alleged systemic failure, survivors and family members of the victims of the deadly 2023 mass shooting in Lewiston, Maine, have refiled their negligence lawsuit against the U.S. government.

The amended suit comes after a crucial report from the U.S. Department of Defense's inspector general revealed a pattern of negligence within the U.S. Army.

The lawsuit alleges that the U.S. Army and its components, including the Defense Department and Keller Army Community Hospital, could have prevented the tragedy, which killed 18 people.

The perpetrator, Army reservist Robert Card, had shown months of escalating mental health issues, paranoia, and violent ideations, including expressing a "hit list" and threatening to "shoot up" an Army Reserve center, all known to military personnel.

The refiled suit specifically cites the Pentagon watchdog report, which concluded the Army failed to follow its own policies by neglecting to report violent threats by service members in almost half of the 2023 investigations reviewed.

The specific report is the Evaluation of DoD Policies and Procedures for Responding to Reports of Violent Threats Made by Service Members (Report No. DODIG-2025-157).

This failure, the report noted, "could increase the risk of additional violent incidents by service members, such as what occurred with SFC (Sgt. 1st Class) Card."

For the plaintiffs' legal team, this pattern of unaddressed threats significantly strengthens their argument.

Attorney Travis Brennan stated that had the Army followed its mandatory policies, it "would have prevented an unstable and mentally ill service member from going back into this community without warning, protection, or a plan to keep us safe."

The suit seeks unspecified damages, arguing that the government's failure to act on clear and repeated warnings directly caused one of the state's most preventable tragedies.

Sports Injury: Quadriplegic Gymnast Sues Academy for $350 Million

The high-stakes world of competitive sports has also become a focal point for negligence claims, often revolving around the safety of equipment and supervision.

Level 10 gymnast Cody Bennett, who was paralyzed after a catastrophic fall from a high bar dismount, has filed a $350 million lawsuit against Evolution Gymnastics Academy and its operators.

The lawsuit claims negligence, asserting that the academy breached its duty of care by providing unsafe facilities.

Specifically, it faults the defendants for installing a loose foam pit that was "shallow in depth and deficient in length and width," and for failing to install shock-absorbing layers beneath the pit.

According to Bennett's attorney, Kevin Biniazan, the inadequacy of the foam pit caused the teenager's head to hit the concrete floor beneath, resulting in his quadriplegia.

Further compounding the claim is the allegation of negligent supervision.

The academy, as a commercial facility, had a responsibility to exercise reasonable care for its young invitees' safety. This duty included providing adequate instruction and ensuring all equipment was in safe working order.

The injury occurred during an "open gym in a coach free environment," an unsupervised practice period. The lawsuit argues that even in a coach-free setting, staff should be present to ensure equipment is safe and used properly.

Though the academy reportedly stopped the open gym practice following the incident, the lawsuit seeks to hold the operators accountable for the lax safety protocols that allegedly led to Bennett's life-altering injury.

Professional Sports: Former Manchester United Player Alleges Medical Negligence

Negligence in the context of professional sports extends beyond facilities to the clinical decisions made by team medical staff.

Former Manchester United defender Axel Tuanzebe has filed a high-value negligence claim against his former club, alleging negligent medical advice.

Tuanzebe, whose final years at the club were heavily impacted by persistent injuries, including being sidelined for 195 days in his last full season is seeking a claim understood to be more than £1 million.

The lawsuit specifically relates to medical advice provided from July 2022 concerning an unknown injury.

While professional athletes accept the inherent risks of playing, a claim of "clinical negligence" posits that the medical care provided fell below the accepted standard of a reasonably qualified professional.

Tuanzebe's legal action suggests that the club's medical guidance or treatment may have contributed to his prolonged physical decline rather than his recovery.

This case highlights the complex "duty of care" that clubs owe their players, setting a potential precedent for increased accountability for medical decisions in professional football.

These three diverse cases underscore the legal principle that where a duty of care exists, whether by a governmental body, a commercial enterprise, or a professional organization a failure to meet a reasonable standard of caution can lead to significant liability when preventable harm occurs.