Landmark Negligence Cases That Changed Personal Injury Law

6 November 2025

Toby Patrick

Want your article or story on our site? Contact us here

Success Starts with Choosing the Right Business for You

Guy Fawkes, Dick Turpin and the Hidden Histories of York

The Lip King: We Need To Take Action On Unlicensed Practitioners

Personal injury law is vital for those who have suffered from negligence or a lack of care with their injury and therefore seek compensation. Over time, several landmark cases have completely transformed personal injury law. Below, we look at some of the key cases that have shaped modern legal principles and how they continue to impact lives today.

Classical building with ornate columns and statues under a cloudy sky. Weathered stone and detailed sculptures convey a historic feel.

Palsgraf vs Long Island Railroad Co. (1928)

One of the oldest and most famous cases in personal injury law is the claim of Helen Palsgraf against Long Island Railroad Co. In this case, Helen was injured when a package containing fireworks exploded on the railroad tracks. The explosion occurred as railway employees were assisting a man boarding a train.

Helen Palsgraf sued for her injuries, which led to a major debate over liability. The court ultimately ruled that the railroad company was not liable, as the harm was not foreseeable. This decision introduced the concept of foreseeability into the doctrine of negligence, emphasising that liability depends on whether harm is a reasonably predictable consequence of the defendant’s actions.

Donoghue vs Stevenson (1932)

Another landmark case from the early 1930s, this one transformed personal injury law across the world. May Donoghue became ill after drinking a bottle of ginger beer that contained a decomposed snail. Although her friend purchased the drink, Donoghue sued the manufacturer, Stevenson, for damages.

The court concluded that Stevenson had a duty of care to ensure the safety of their products, even without direct contact between the manufacturer and consumer. This case established the modern principle of negligence and influenced similar legal doctrines internationally.

Baker v. City of St. Louis (1967)

In this case, Baker sued the City of St. Louis after being injured while attempting to board a bus. He argued that the city failed to ensure proper maintenance of its buses and adequate training of drivers. The city claimed sovereign immunity, meaning it could not be sued.

However, the court ruled that the city could be held liable under the doctrine of negligence. This case reshaped the modern understanding of government liability, ensuring that cities cannot rely on sovereign immunity when negligence or personal injury is involved.

Roe v. Wade (1973)

Although best known as a landmark decision in reproductive rights, Roe v. Wade also had implications for personal injury and medical law. Jane Roe challenged Texas laws that prohibited abortion, arguing for her right to privacy.

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the constitutional right to privacy extended to a woman’s decision to have an abortion. While primarily focused on bodily autonomy, the case reinforced the importance of medical rights and personal safety, principles closely related to personal injury and negligence law.

Berg v. Nationwide Mutual Insurance Co. (1978)

In this case, Berg sought compensation from Nationwide Mutual Insurance Company under his insurance policy. The dispute centred on how the company interpreted policy coverage. The court ruled that insurance companies cannot deny coverage to victims based on technicalities or unclear wording, describing such behaviour as professional negligence.

This case transformed the way insurance contracts are written, reinforcing the need for fairness and transparency between insurers and policyholders.

McDonald’s Hot Coffee Case: Liebeck v. McDonald’s (1994)

Perhaps the most famous personal injury case of all time, this lawsuit involved Stella Liebeck, who suffered third-degree burns after spilling hot coffee purchased from McDonald’s. She was hospitalised and incurred serious medical expenses.

The jury found that McDonald’s had acted with gross negligence by serving coffee at a dangerously high temperature. The case sent shockwaves through the legal and corporate world, leading to stronger consumer protection laws and the introduction of visible safety warnings on hot beverage containers.

It also sparked global debate about corporate responsibility, personal accountability and public perception of compensation claims.

Summary

Personal injury law continues to evolve through court decisions that balance fairness, duty of care and responsibility. From the snail in the bottle to the coffee cup warning, each case has shaped how we understand negligence and justice in everyday life.

While not every claim succeeds, these landmark rulings have transformed the modern legal landscape, ensuring that individuals and institutions are held accountable for the safety and well-being of others.

Current Most Read

Rugby lad culture needs to stop

Gregory Devine
Oct 9, 2024
3 min read

My adventure at university is continuing and, whilst it’s full on, with many lectures and extra work, I’m loving it.

My adventure at university is continuing and, whilst it’s full on, with many lectures and extra work, I’m loving it.

Going to university means meeting new people I wouldn’t necessarily encounter. Coming from a working-class town in Yorkshire, the ‘posh rugby lad’, with Rugby lad culture, is a type I’ve not met until now—I wish I never had.

Arrogant, entitled, privileged young men, unfortunately, ruin the experience of university somewhat. It’s not every posh boy, but it does seem that the majority carry a disdain for working-class people—they don’t even try to hide their disrespectful opinions. They think they’re better than most other university students because Daddy paid their tuition fees.

With the greatest of respect, we’re all at the same Russell group university. We all achieved the required grades to get there. Just because I’ve been loaned the tuition fees does not make me any less entitled to a place on my course. Luckily, because I’ve chosen to study computer science, the rugby lads aren’t constantly around me. Had I been on an engineering or economics course, however, my lecture theatre would’ve been full of Schöffel jackets, signet rings and mullets.

Is this a generalisation? Yes. But generalisations are usually correct!

This isn’t a depiction of every ‘rugby lad’, of course. I’ve met some rugby players who are genuine, kind, respectful people—but I do feel they’re in the minority. The consequence of the ‘posh boy’ culture means that some freshers, who would’ve liked to have played rugby at university, have become disengaged; they’ve looked elsewhere for something to do in their downtime. Some have turned to American Football, which appears to perpetuate a positive culture that allows for fun and banter whilst still remaining respectful. In other words: normalcy.

The disrespect these posh rugby lads give women is of particular concern to me. Whilst it isn’t obvious at first, should you find yourself in a pub with a group of them, watch how they treat girls. Whilst their behaviour isn’t abusive, they appear to project a sense of ownership. They often throw their arms around females’ necks, in what I consider an almost aggressive manner, in order to assert their dominance. What infuriates me is how those around them accept their actions. The women they mix with don’t seem to have an issue with it— probably because they’re used to it—but when a rugby lad tries to do the same with a girl from a working-class background, she, quite rightly, reprimands their pathetic behaviour.

I’m not alone in my opinion. As I write, I’m surrounded by my flatmates who are working hard on their many different courses; they all agree that most rugby lads are disrespectful, or at the very least, irritating. Alcohol is definitely a factor in determining the level of respect these young men are able to show. Whilst sober, they can appear normal, and I can actually enjoy having a conversation with them. When drunk, however, their Dutch courage is far too high, and their sense of entitlement becomes intolerable. It’s a shame, as I really enjoy watching rugby, but as soon as a drop of booze hits these guys’ bloodstreams, I don’t want to be in their company, as they simply resort to disrespecting or belittling anyone who’s not one of them.

I’ll conclude by again reiterating that there are exceptions to every rule. Whilst ‘posh rugby lads’ are not my favourite type of person, that doesn’t make them awful human beings. It’s just a case of different upbringings—and this is why university is so good. It brings people together from all walks of life.

Learning how to accommodate and appreciate others is one of the greatest lessons available at university…it’s just not on the curriculum.