Tort Law
Essay Preview: Tort Law
Report this essay
Tort Law
Imagine being pursued and attacked by a vicious dog. This dog not only caused physical damage, but also mental instability for you towards dogs. In this case, if the dog has an owner then there would be plausible cause to sue. This is where tort law comes into play. “Tort law is the name given to a body of law that creates, and provides remedies for, civil wrongs that do not arise out of contratual duties. A person who is legally injured may be able to use tort law to recover damages from someone who is legally responsible, or “liable,” for those injuries (Webster).” Generally speaking, tort law defines what constitutes a legal injury, and establishes the circumstances under which one person may be held liable for anothers injury.
The word tort is translated to mean the word “wrong”. In the process of someone being negligent,or in the “wrong”, these people can be sent to trial on the basis of tort law. Deliberate torts causing bodily harm, property harm, and business are ruled as crimes in the court system. For instance, if somebody throws a ball and accidentally hits a pedestrian in the eye, the pedestrian may sue the person who threw the ball for losses caused by the accident. Losses may consist of costs of medical treatment or lost income during time off work. Whether or not the pedestrian wins will depend on whether they can prove the thrower engaged in tortious conduct in injuring the pedestrian. In most cases by failing to exercise ordinary care in undertaking the activity that caused the injury. One of the main topics for the basis of tort law is determining the “standard of care.” Standard of care is a legal phrase for deciding between when conduct is or is not tortious. If put another way, the big issue is whether a person suffers the loss from his own injury, or whether it gets transferred to someone else.
In the United States, the largest portion of tort liability is dealt in negligence. Negligence is generally defined as, “conduct that is culpable because it falls short of what a reasonable person would do to protect another individual from a foreseeable risks of harm (Webster).” Unless the injured person can prove that the person they believe injured them acted with at least negligence to cause their injury, tort law will not compensate them. Tort law also recognizes intentional and strict liability torts. Intentional torts consist of intentional infliction of emotional distress, defamation, false imprisonment, battery, and assault. In the case given to us Paul was assaulted by a sixteen year old, Dina. Dina was diagnosed with schizophrenia and given medication to help with her sometimes violent alter egos. Dina’s mother, Mary, was unaware that her daughter had stopped taking her medication for about a week when the assualt happened.
Dina approached a neighbor, Paul, as he walked along the sidewalk fronting Mary’s home. When she was face to face with Paul, Dina, without provaction, gestured threateningly and screamed, “I know you’re out to get me and I’m going to get you first,” and then strode away. Assault is an action that causes the victim to fear an imminent battery and can occur without the battery ever happening. In this case Paul was assulted and without him having any knowledge of Dina’s mental illness he was concerned. Paul phoned Mary about the incident. Mary told Paul that “Dina has sometimes made threats to others, but I do not think she will try to hurt you and I assure you that this will not happen again.” Paul believed Mary’s assurances and, for that reason, did not seek to avoid Dina.
Mary questioned Dina about the incident, scolded her, and asked if Dina was taking her medication. When Dina said she was, Mary did not pursue the matter. Two days after Dina confronted Paul, Dina saw him raking leaves which had fallen into the street fronting their adjoining homes. Dina got on her bicycle and rode it as rapidly as she could directly at Paul. Although Dina swerved away from Paul at the last moment, Paul reacted by diving to one side. He struck his head on the curb and suffered a severe consussion and facial injures. Now, although Dina did not physically touch Paul she can still be liable for battery, not just assault. Battery is a touching of another person in a way that is unwanted or offensive. The touch does not have to hurt the victim, sexual touching that is offensive, but not painful, is battery. Also, an intentional action that does hurt someone may be battery even if the injury is unintentional, as in this case when Paul is injured when diving away from Dina.
Although Paul was assaulted and battered by Dina, he may not be entitled to recover against Dina for her actions because of her illness. Instead, Paul may be entitled to recover against Mary for negligence and liability. When Paul phoned Mary and told her of the incident, she was entitled to tell Paul that her daughter, Dina, suffered from