Multistate Bar Examination Practice Question

The correct answer is the 'but for' test, which asks whether the harm would have occurred without the defendant's conduct. In this case, the test considers whether the pedestrian's injuries would have occurred if the driver had not negligently run the red light. The fact that the pedestrian chose to walk instead of taking the bus is irrelevant under the 'but for' test. The 'substantial factor' test is occasionally used in cases with multiple potential causes, but it is not the primary method for determining causation in a straightforward case like this. 'Foreseeability' is a factor in proximate cause, not causation in fact, and 'intervening causes' refer to events that occur between the defendant's conduct and the plaintiff’s injury.