Mastering Torts
Mastering Torts: Overview of Torts Personal Injuries and Property Damage
General Principles of Torts
American tort law primarily concerns liability for personal injuries and property damage.
The law of torts includes a diverse range of rules and theories of liability due to the vastness of human activities.
A. Torts and Crimes
Tort Action: Initiated by individuals seeking personal relief (often monetary damages or injunctions).
Criminal Prosecution: Initiated by state officers aiming to protect public interests, involving potential imprisonment or fines.
Standards of Proof:
In torts, the plaintiff must prove their case by a "preponderance of the evidence" (more likely than not).
In criminal cases, guilt must be established "beyond a reasonable doubt."
B. Torts and Contracts
Conduct can be both a contract breach and a tort (e.g., injuries from a defective product).
Contract Obligations: Voluntarily assumed duties between consenting parties.
Tort Obligations: Imposed by law to protect individuals from harm, even if they are strangers.
Important Distinctions:
Types of defenses available differ between torts and contracts.
Damages in torts may include punitive damages, generally not available in contracts.
C. State Common Law
Much of tort law is derived from state common law, varying significantly by jurisdiction.
Legislative influences include:
No-fault auto insurance laws.
Workers' compensation laws.
Medical malpractice standards.
D. Public Policy and Costs of Accidents
Tort law aims to:
Fairly allocate costs of past accidents based on fault (who is responsible).
Deter future accidents by preventing risky behaviors.
Courts consider various public policy principles, including:
Importance of predictable legal rules.
Risks to economic growth from tort liability.
Individual responsibility versus societal loss distribution.
Fair compensation versus limits on liability based on fault.
E. Settlement vs. Litigation
Most tort cases (over 90%) are settled out of court.
F. Categories of Tort Liability
All tortious conduct fits into:
Intentional Infliction of Injury.
Negligence.
Strict Liability.
1. Intentional Infliction of Injury
Intent: Divided into two types:
Purpose: Desire to produce a specific result.
Knowledge: Substantial certainty that a result will occur.
Examples:
Terrorist throwing a bomb intending to kill, injuring a bystander.
Child moving a chair under an elderly woman, resulting in injury (Garratt v. Dailey).
2. Negligence
Defined as failure to exercise reasonable care leading to harm.
Foreseeability: Central in determining negligence claims (Doe v. Roe).
Key case for negligence liability: Cohen v. Petty, where sudden illness negated negligence claims.
Types of Negligence:
Recklessness: Extreme lack of care, can be treated differently from ordinary negligence.
Comparative Negligence: Where negligence by the plaintiff reduces recovery; can be pure (e.g., damages reduced based on fault percentage) or modified (plaintiff recovers if below a certain fault threshold).
3. Strict Liability
Tort liability without proof of fault.
Common in defective products (product liability) and employer liability for employee actions (respondeat superior).
Example: Strict liability for dog owners if their dog bites someone (Harris v. Anderson County Sheriff's Office).
G. Consequences of Conduct Classification
Liability Scope: Higher culpability (intentional/conduct) can extend liability further than for negligence.
Damages: Determined by the classification of the defendant's conduct, with punitive damages available for intentional or egregious conduct.
H. Respondeat Superior
Employers may be held vicariously liable for their employees' actions within the scope of employment.
Employee's intention and conduct will determine the extent of employer liability.
I. Immunities and Workers’ Compensation
Traditional immunities include sovereign immunity, spousal immunity, and parental immunity.
Workers' compensation laws provide compensation without proof of fault, often offering lower payouts than tort litigation.
J. Statutes of Limitations
Bars commencement of lawsuits after a specified period based on the type of tort.
K. Liability Insurance
Essential in tort cases; liability insurance typically excludes intentional torts, influencing claim characterization.
L. Basic Intentional Torts
Battery: Intentional, unconsented harmful or offensive touching.
Must prove: Intent (purpose or knowledge), touching absence of consent (e.g., physical abuse).
Damages can include compensatory, nominal, or punitive.
Assault: Intentional creation of apprehension of imminent unconsented contact with another.
M. Outrage (Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress)
Involves extreme and outrageous conduct leading to severe emotional distress.
Claims must prove intent to cause distress or reckless disregard plus causation and actual severe distress.
N. Defenses and privileges in intentional torts
Consent: Negates wrongful element; includes actual, apparent, and implied consent.
Necessity: Public or private necessity may justify intrusion with varying liability.
Self-Defense: Reasonable force is permitted, but must cease once threat is gone.
O. Negligence: Basic Principles
Defined as conduct posing unreasonable risk of harm; actionable only with actual loss.
Duty, breach, causation (factual and proximate), and damage are core elements of negligence.
1. Standards of Care
Reasonable-person standard; varies by situation (e.g., child standard for minors, higher standard for professionals).
2. Causation
Factual causation established mainly through the but-for test, proximate causation judged on foreseeability of harm.
3. Proving Negligence
Evidence of Custom: Local customs may inform but not determine negligence, subject to circumstantial evidence validation.
Res Ipsa Loquitur: Shifts the burden of proof on causation to the defendant, if the event causing harm ordinarily does not occur without negligence.
P. Damages
Jury instructions guide damage compensation types (e.g., past/future lost earnings, pain, suffering).
Hedonic Damages: Awards for loss of ability to engage in enjoyable activities.
Loss of Consortium: Spousal claims for loss of companionship and service due to injury.
1. Special Considerations
Medical monitoring for future health risks.
Collateral-source rule excludes external compensation from recovery limits.
Avoidable-consequences rule limits recovery for damages that could have been avoided by reasonable actions.
Q. Conclusions
Torts law encompasses a complex interplay of rules, principles, and judicial interpretations aimed at ensuring fairness and justice. Understanding these multifaceted elements is essential for practice and assessment of tort-related issues.