In determining damages, which principle allows defendants to be liable for injuries caused despite pre-existing conditions of the plaintiff?

The principle that allows defendants to be liable for injuries caused to a plaintiff despite the existence of pre-existing conditions is known as the Eggshell Skull Rule. This legal doctrine dictates that a defendant must take their victim as they find them, which means they are held responsible for the full extent of the injuries inflicted, even if those injuries are more severe than what might have been expected due to the plaintiff's pre-existing vulnerabilities or conditions.

Under this rule, if a defendant's negligent or intentional actions cause harm, they are liable for all resulting damages. For example, if a plaintiff has a pre-existing condition that makes them particularly susceptible to injury, and the defendant's actions lead to an exacerbation of that condition, the defendant cannot escape liability simply because the plaintiff was more seriously harmed than an average person would have been.

This principle reinforces the idea of full accountability in tort law, ensuring that defendants cannot evade responsibility simply due to the specific physical or psychological characteristics of the plaintiff. The focus is on the injury caused rather than the predisposition of the victim; therefore, the defendant remains fully liable for all damages resulting from their wrongful act.