STREET LAW

"For every interference with a recognized legal right,

the law will provide a remedy"

UNIT 3: Torts

Chapter 18

Torts: A Civil Wrong

Civil law deals with torts, or civil wrongs, against individualsIt protects people by helping them avoid problems & resolve

disputesIn civil law, the injured person (plaintiff) can sue the person who

caused the harm (defendant)When determining whether a tort has been committed, the ? of

liability, or responsibility for the harm, must be answeredThe issue of negligence by either the plaintiff or the defendant

must also be addressed when determining whether a tort has been committed

After the ?s of liability & negligence are answered, the court can award $—paid by the wrongdoer—to the victim of the tort

Torts: A Civil Wrong

CRIMINAL LAW CIVIL LAW

Crime: when someone commits a wrong against society; also usually a specific victim

Tort: when someone commits a crime against an individual

Prosecuted & punished by the state (prosecutor)

Harmed individual (plaintiff) seeks to win a judgment against the defendant (accused wrongdoer)

Punished with jail or other penalties

Punished by paying monetary damages ($)

CRIME same illegal activity Tort

Background—The Study of Torts

The overall purpose of this unit on torts is to provide practical information about the largest body of civil law—torts

Tort law changes over time depending on how society calculates the

benefits of permitting certain behaviorsvs.

the costs of those behaviors to other people or to society

Civil law exists to help society settle disputes fairly, efficiently, & with certainty by making wrongdoers (or, in some cases, the parties in the best position to absorb the loss) pay $ to the person(s) harmed

Antisocial behavior can be deterred by assigning a cost (liability) to civil wrongs (torts)

The Idea of Liability  

Tort law deals with basic ?’s such aswho should be responsible, or liable, for harm

caused by human activities○ almost any activity can be a source of harm &

therefore of tort liability—driving a car, operating a business, speaking, writing, or using property

how much ($) should the responsible party have to pay?

Tort law emphasizes responsibilityThe issue is who acted reasonably/unreasonably &How much $ should be paid?

○ Civil law does not seek to punish, although many people equate loss of $ with severe punishment

Almost any activity can be a source of harm & therefore of tort liability

A tort occurs when 1 person causes injury to another person or to another’s property or reputation

Tort law protects people by helping them avoid problems & resolve disputes

In civil cases, the injured party (the plaintiff) can sue the person believed to be legally responsible for the harm (the defendant)Tort law provides the injured party with a remedy,

something to make up for the harm done—this usually takes the form of monetary damages [$]

However, when determining whether a tort has been committed, the question of liability, or responsibility for the harm, must be answered

The issue of negligence by either the plaintiff or the defendant must also be addressed when determining whether a tort has been committed

After the questions of liability & negligence are answered, the court can award $ (called damages)— paid by the wrongdoer—to the victim of the tort

Damages are meant to compensate the plaintiff for any financial, physical, or emotional costs associated with the injury

Requiring payment of damages is intended to prevent future injuries & losses& to encourage more reasonable behavior

In a true accident, the victim will have to bear the costs of the injury

The plaintiff does not always need to sue in order to receive damages

Often the two parties can meet & make an agreement—or settlement—on compensation for the injury

Tort law emphasizes responsibility—it establishes an expectation that people should act with reasonable care toward other people & their property

Tort law also establishes standards of care that society expects from peopleThe law requires us to act with reasonable care

toward people & their propertyFailure to exercise reasonable care may result in

legal liabilityThe person harmed may sue the person who acted

unreasonably for damagesRequiring payment of damages is intended to prevent

future injuries & losses & to encourage more reasonable behavior

Though civil law doesn’t seek to punish—many people equate loss of $ with severe punishmentIn fact, many would rather lose their freedom for a

time than their $ The deterrent value of civil law is based on a

desire of people to avoid paying for losses

Liability vs. Moral Responsibility

Liability—legal responsibility for harm Moral responsibility—being morally at fault for

harming someoneMoral responsibility is one of the factors that courts

look at in developing the law of torts & drawing up the rules of who will pay for injuries people suffer

The Idea of Torts: Yesterday, Today, & Tomorrow 

Tort law has changed over time to reflect changes in society & its values

Tort law tries to weigh the usefulness of certain conduct against the harm that conduct might cause

Usefulness ? Harm Tort law also tries to preserve individual choice

(warnings allow individuals to make informed choices)

State courts handle most tort cases

Tort law is generally based on common law, which is created through court decisions written by judges

Tort law can also be based on written laws, known as statutes, which are passed by state legislatures

There is a difference between regulation of new technology through criminal law & regulation through tort lawFor example—there may be statutes requiring auto

manufacturers to meet certain emission standards or to include certain safety features such as seat belts & air bags

However, autos are also “regulated” by courts in the sense that people injured as a result of defective autos can collect damages from the manufacturers through civil suits

The tort system has several advantages:By making product manufacturers responsible for

the injuries to consumers caused by the product, companies will engage in the following cost-benefit analysis:- It would be most cost-effective to spend $ on safety

as long as the co. will save more $ on the injuries (& thus liability) avoided by the safety expenditure

- It would not be cost-effective to spend more $ on product safety than would be saved by decreased liability

Therefore, tort liability tends to drive co.’s to spend app. the right amount of $ on safety costs

Although co.’s may also take into account punitive damages, legal fees, the option of spending $ on better legal aid to win lawsuits rather than spending $ on safety to avoid lawsuits, & the fact that some injured people don’t sue!

If everyone who was injured by a product was able to win a lawsuit against the manufacturer the product would have to be redesigned for greater safety or perhaps withdrawn from the market

Types of TortsThere are three major types of tort liability: Intentional Wrongs

An intentional wrong occurs when a person purposefully harms another person or his or her property, or both (may also be crimes)

Acts of Negligence Negligence—the most common unintentional tort—occurs when one

person unintentionally inflicts injury upon another person Even though the injury was not intentional, the person who caused

injury can still be held liable for acting carelessly & causing harm Strict Liability

Strict liability requires people engaged in certain dangerous activities to assume extra responsibility for the consequences of their actions

3 groups face strict liability: owners of dangerous animals, people who engage in highly dangerous activities, & manufacturers & sellers of defective consumer products

Background—Strict Liability Strict liability can be a difficult concept to

grasp For both intentional torts & negligence,

plaintiffs must prove some kind of fault On the other hand, strict liability is actually

liability without fault, or at least w/o the requirement to prove fault

Reminder a primary purpose of tort law is to compensate ($) plaintiffs for their injuries!

The doctrine of strict liability allows plaintiffs to recover damages ($) from defendants engaged in unusually dangerous activities where the risk of harm can’t be eliminated by exercising reasonable careFor example, demolishing a building, or using

explosives in an urban area

Taking Your Case to Court  

Tort law deals with disputes between individuals or groups of individuals

Unlike criminal law, the government is not responsible for bringing the case to court, & defendants never go to prison

While both criminal law & tort law require substantial evidence to prove the defendant is responsible, criminal cases require more convincing evidenceCriminal Case: Beyond a Reasonable Doubt (95%)Civil Case: Preponderance of the Evidence (50%)

Although a tort & a crime are different legal actions, the same harmful activity can sometimes be both a crime & a tort

Background—Who Can Be Sued?

Almost anyone can be sued Employers may be responsible for many of the torts

committed by their employees—this is called the doctrine of respondeat superiorIt means that an employer is responsible for the torts of its

employees, committed within the scope of their employment

It is a type of vicarious liability—by reason of some relationship bet. 2 people (for example, employer & employee), the negligence of 1 (the employee) may be charged against the other (the employer), even though he had no part in the act or did nothing to encourage it

In some states parents can be sued for torts committed by their childrenGenerally, parents are not held vicariously liable for

their children’s torts—there must be some negligence on the part of the parents (such as inadequate supervision) for the parents to be held liable

Children who commit torts may be sued if it can be proven that the child acted unreasonably for a person of that age

The Federal Torts Claims Act

Allows plaintiffs to sue the U.S. The claim must be presented to the

appropriate federal agency before it is filed A judge hears the suit The contingency fees lawyers charge are

strictly limited

Immunity

Senators & Reps. are immune from arrest during attendance at sessiongoing to & returning from session& they shall not be questioned in any other place

for speeches or debates in either House

Presidential Immunity

Comes from the 1982 case of Nixon vs. FitzgeraldA. Ernest Fitzgerald brought a civil suit against

President Nixon for firing him from his gov. job as a management analyst w/the Air Force for illegitimate reasons

The U.S. Supreme Court held that presidents are immune from civil suits arising from their public duties because the Pres. might be a vulnerable target for numerous suits & this would interfere with the ability to perform duties

In the case of Clinton v. Jones, the Court held that a president doesn’t have even temporary immunity from a civil suit arising from actions unrelated to the president’s official dutiesPaula Jones sued President Clinton for alleged

sexual harassment that occurred before Clinton became president, while he was governor of Arkansas

Class Action Suits A class action suit occurs when a group of plaintiffs

sues a defendant as a groupEx: A case filed by female employees of the Dept. of

Social Services & the Board of Educ. of NY in 1977The women had identical complaints so they filed their

claims togetherThe policies of both org.’s compelled pregnant employees

to take unpaid leaves of absence before medical reasons required such leaves

The courts decided in favor of the plaintiffs, calling mandatory leaves unconstitutional, but denied claims for back pay

Insurance 

Liability insurance is a contract or agreement in which the insured person makes regular payments (premiums) to an insurance company

In return, the insurance company agrees to pay for certain damages the insured person might causeThere are limits to how much will be paidMay also provide an attorney for court

Liability insurance protects doctors, lawyers, manufacturers, homeowners, & driversDoctors are protected against malpractice suits—

claims that a professional person provided services in a negligent manner

Manufacturers are protected against lawsuits brought by customers injured when using their product

Homeowners & renters have coverage for loss & damage to property

Although many types of insurance exist, very few insurance policies cover a person who has committed an intentional harm

Car Insurance

Medical: for you & your passengers no matter who is at fault

Collision: damage to your car, even if you were at fault Deductible: amount you pay 1st towards repairs

The ↑ the deductible the ↓ the collision insurance Comprehensive: protects you against damage or loss to

your car from causes other than collision Uninsured Motorist: protects you from other drivers who

do not have insurance (or not enough) No-Fault: your co. will pay up to a certain amount for

injuries you receive in an accident, no matter who is at fault—you waive your right to sue the other party

No-Fault vs. Liability?Liability ins.—your co. pays the other driver only if

you were at faultNo-Fault—may allow settlement of claims w/o the

delay & expense of determining fault in a court case○ Are limited to a certain amount of $○ Usually cover only personal injuries but not damages

to your car○ If damages are ↑ than the no-fault limits, the injured

party may be able to sue the other party

Liability Coverages 3 limits on how much a person can collect

Injuries per personTotal injuries to all persons in accidentProperty damage per accident

100/300/50$100,000 per person for personal injury$300,000 per accident for all personal injuries$50,000 per accident for property damage

You are responsible for any amount due over your limits!

Worker’s Compensation Automatically compensates (pays) employees who are

injured on the job Paid even if they were negligent

(unless intoxicated)Pay is reduced or prohibited if refused to follow safety

procedures(ex: welder not wearing safety goggles)

Do not have to go to court to prove fault of employerReceive pay (2/3) while recoveringGive up right to sue employer$ awarded for injury is set by a state scheduleIs the exclusive remedy for on-the-job injuries—no civil lawsuit

Background—Worker’s Compensation Worker’s comp. is not always an absolute bar

to employees suing employers In a few states an employee can sue an

employer when the injury is a result of fraudulent conduct by the employer

The employee can sue an employer in some states under the dual capacity doctrine

This is a situation in which the employee is injured, not necessarily within the scope of employment, but because of the nature of the businessFor example: suppose a nurse works for a doctor & is

injured by that doctor while being treated as a patientThe fact that she is employed by the doctor does not

necessarily preclude her from suing the doctor for medical malpractice

Although workers’ comp. systems usually provide remedies aimed at avoiding litigation, some disputes are resolved in courtIn 1 case, Henry Perry, Jr. was injured in 1986

during his employment for the Bronco Construction Co.

The insurance co. paid workers’ comp. benefits for a kidney injury sustained during the accident

5 months after the accident, the plaintiff experienced prostatitis—an inflammation of the prostate gland

Perry claimed his ailment was the result of the injury he sustained 5 months earlier

The insurance co. that represented the Bronco Construction Co. contested the claim

The plaintiff (Henry Perry, Jr.) was awarded the compensation

The defendant (Bronco Construction Co.) appealed

The appellate court upheld the lower court’s decision

The court held that the claimant’s disability is presumed to have resulted from the accident, if the claimant was in good health prior to the accident & the symptoms appeared after the accident

Additionally, the evidence showed a reasonable possibility of a casual connection between the accident & the disabling condition