Palsgraf v. Long Island Railroad Co

In Palsgraf v. Long Island Railroad Co. (248 N.Y. 339 [1928]), the Court made clear that, while a juridical relationship was not necessary to duty, negligence could not exist "at large or in the abstract", but only "in relation to the plaintiff" (id., at 346). The classic statement is that "the risk reasonably to be perceived defines the duty to be obeyed, and risk imports relation; it is risk to another or to others within the range of apprehension." (Id., at 344.) In that case "relation" was absent, since "there was nothing in the situation to suggest to the most cautious mind that the parcel wrapped in newspaper would spread wreckage through the station." (Id., at 345.) "Negligence, like risk, is . . . a term of relation." (Id.)