---
title: "Set out whether the defendant failed to use ordinary care"
url: "https://ailawframework.com/practice/personal-injury-and-compensation/set-out-the-precaution-questions-for-a-failure-to-take-care/united-states"
type: "task_jurisdiction_version"
site: "AI Law Framework"
id: "A21-SB20261022-5-US"
practice_area: "Personal Injury & Compensation (workers compensation, CTP/TAC, medical negligence)"
tier: "yellow"
lawyer_review: "required"
jurisdictions: ["US"]
last_reviewed: "2026-10-22"
---

# Set out whether the defendant failed to use ordinary care

> From the pleaded risk and the precautions said to have been omitted, build a question table. Do not decide whether the defendant was negligent.

Canonical page: https://ailawframework.com/practice/personal-injury-and-compensation/set-out-the-precaution-questions-for-a-failure-to-take-care/united-states  
Last reviewed: 2026-10-22

Site index for agents: https://ailawframework.com/llms.txt

## Key facts

| Fact | Value |
| --- | --- |
| Practice area | [Personal Injury & Compensation (workers compensation, CTP/TAC, medical negligence)](https://ailawframework.com/practice/personal-injury-and-compensation.md) |
| Human involvement | Yellow: Lawyer and AI draft together |
| How AI is used | From the pleaded risk and the precautions said to have been omitted, build a question table. Do not decide whether the defendant was negligent. |
| What the lawyer must review | California Civil Code § 1714(a) asks whether an injury was occasioned by a want of ordinary care or skill in the management of property or person. The opened section does not list probability, likely seriousness, burden of the precaution, or social utility. ABA Formal Opinion 512 says a lawyer who relies on generative output without an appropriate degree of independent verification can breach Model Rule 1.1, and that the tool cannot replace the lawyer's judgment. You decide whether ordinary care was used and you write the pleading. Do not paste the precaution questions in Civil Liability Act 2002 (NSW) s 5B into a California advice. |
| Written for | United States |
| Applies to | [Set out the precaution questions for a failure to take care](https://ailawframework.com/practice/personal-injury-and-compensation/set-out-the-precaution-questions-for-a-failure-to-take-care.md) |

## Checking plan

- What the AI does: From the pleaded risk and the precautions said to have been omitted, build a question table. Do not decide whether the defendant was negligent.
- Basis: Checked against the linked sources on 22 October 2026. Confirm the current instrument before reliance.

## Notes

- The forum may add breach factors that § 1714(a) does not spell out. Open those authorities before you use them.
- Formal Opinion 512: the amount of verification depends on the tool and the task.

## Sources

- [California Civil Code § 1714, responsibility for wilful acts and for want of ordinary care](https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=CIV&sectionNum=1714.) (checked 2026-10-22)
- [ABA Formal Opinion 512, Generative Artificial Intelligence Tools (29 July 2024)](https://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/administrative/professional_responsibility/ethics-opinions/aba-formal-opinion-512.pdf) (checked 2026-10-22)

*Practice guidance for planning and review. Confirm current primary sources and the requirements of the actual matter. This is general information, not legal advice.*