A woman rescued a pair of dogs from a rescue organization and put them in a cage on her backyard patio until she could get back from work. Later that morning, a water cooler deliveryman carried a five-gallon bottle to the woman's back door as she had requested. As the delivery man entered the woman's backyard, the dogs started barking ferociously. The deliveryman immediately dropped the water bottle and ran because he thought he was about to be attacked. The bottle broke, spilling water all over the woman's patio. The deliveryman did not inform the woman or the water company of the broken water bottle, nor did he clean up the spill. Early in the evening, but before the woman returned home, the dogs started to bark again. Upon hearing the barking, the woman's neighbor entered the backyard to make sure nothing was amiss. The woman had given the neighbor the key to her house and permission to enter her property in order to handle any issues that might arise while she was at work. As the neighbor approached the cage, she slipped on the puddle on the patio and broke her arm. If the neighbor sues the deliveryman for negligence, of the following, which is the court most likely to conclude? Answers:
A. The deliveryman is not liable because there was only actual causation.
B. The deliveryman is not liable because there was only proximate causation.
C. The deliveryman is not liable because there was neither actual nor proximate causation.
D. The deliveryman may be held liable because there was both actual and proximate causation.