I deliberately hedged each defendant's possible negligence.
D1 (Defendant 1) might've negligently injured P. P falls to the pavement, and bleeds. D1 panics, and runs away. D1 is a billionaire.
Next, D2 might've negligently injured P too. After perhaps negligently injuring P, D2 drives P to a hospital’s emergency department
("ED"). D2 is bankrupt. D2's net worth is merely $900.
The ED's lone overworked doctor, D3, might've negligently injured P too. 9 hours after being admitted to the ED, P dies.
Discuss merely all parties’ tortious liability. Ignore — do NOT discuss — damages. Assume that D1 shall NOT sue D2, because D2 is bankrupt and beggared. But D2 can still sue D3.
D1 and D2 shall try to argue that D3 broke the chain of causation.
But wouldn't D1's and D2's argument that D3 broke the chain of causation, be the exact same? If not, why not?
In other words, imagine that D1 wrote a Statement of Defence before D2. After changing D1 to D2, can't D2 just copy and paste D1's Statement of Defence?