About This Item

Share This Item

The AAPG/Datapages Combined Publications Database

AAPG Bulletin

Abstract


Volume: 63 (1979)

Issue: 3. (March)

First Page: 434

Last Page: 435

Title: Sources of Liability for Geologic Hazards: ABSTRACT

Author(s): Alan H. Coogan

Article Type: Meeting abstract

Abstract:

End_Page 434------------------------------

The range of liability for damage from geologic hazards has a basis in common law and consequently is explicit in most states as such or as modified by statute.

The range of liability extends from absolute through phases of contingent to limited or no liability. In general, absolute liability in civil cases is imposed for acts which are ultrahazardous, inherently dangerous, or public nuisances. Contingent liability exists where an act or omission is intentional or the result of a breach of a duty which leads to a foreseeable damage. Liability is limited or there is no liability where the damage resulted from an act of God, where there were supervening acts of others or where no legal injury occurred. For each potential attachment of liability, there is a defense or range of defenses. In addition, persons who speak out in a defamatory manner may incur liability for that speech unless protected by privilege or on constitutional grounds.

The legal basis for liability for damage from geologic hazards is in tort and property law (including water law) where traditionally the different degrees of liability have been imposed for differing damages to land and the use of land. Loss of vertical support, flooding, and pollution are commonly absolute liability or intentional torts. Damage from landslides and mixed geologic situations commonly fall under the rules of negligence and one would expect the same to apply to damage to manmade structures from earth movements. Interferences with groundwater supplies may result in civil liability depending on one of the four major theories of groundwater law.

Professional geologists in public practice or those who involve themselves in public debate without adequate preparation are likely target defendants where damages result from projects which incorporate their recommendations, where they fail to act when there was a duty to do so, and where their unwarranted alarms cause expensive delays.

End_of_Article - Last_Page 435------------

Copyright 1997 American Association of Petroleum Geologists