UNIT 3: Torts
Chapter 18
Torts: A Civil Wrong

Civil law deals with torts, or civil wrongs, against
individuals
 It protects people by helping them avoid problems & resolve




disputes
In 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 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 ?s of liability & negligence are answered, the court
can award $—paid by the wrongdoer—to the victim of the
tort
Torts: A Civil Wrong
CRIMINAL LAW
CIVIL LAW
Crime: when someone commits a Tort: when someone commits a
wrong against society; also usually crime against an individual
a specific victim
Prosecuted & punished by the
state (prosecutor)
Harmed individual (plaintiff) seeks
to win a judgment against the
defendant (accused wrongdoer)
Punished with jail or other
penalties
Punished by paying monetary
damages ($)
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 behaviors
vs.
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 as
 who 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 responsibility
 The 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 people
 The law requires us to act with reasonable care
toward people & their property
 Failure to exercise reasonable care may result in
legal liability
 The person harmed may sue the person who acted
unreasonably for damages
 Requiring 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
punishment
 In 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 someone

 Moral 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 law
 For 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 Torts
There 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 care
 For 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 evidence
 Criminal 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 superior

 It 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 children
 Generally, 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 session
 going 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.
Fitzgerald
 A. 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 duties
 Paula 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 group
 Ex: A case filed by female employees of the Dept. of
Social Services & the Board of Educ. of NY in 1977
 The women had identical complaints so they filed their
claims together
 The 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 cause

 There are limits to how much will be paid
 May also provide an attorney for court

Liability insurance protects doctors, lawyers,
manufacturers, homeowners, & drivers
 Doctors 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 fault
 No-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 person
 Total injuries to all persons in accident
 Property 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 employer
Receive pay (2/3) while recovering
Give up right to sue employer
$ awarded for injury is set by a state schedule
Is 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
business

 For example: suppose a nurse works for a doctor & is
injured by that doctor while being treated as a patient
 The 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 court
 In 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