What is a Tort In Criminal law

What is a Tort? • In Criminal law a wrong=crime • In Civil law a wrong=tort (not a crime, a wrong) • Defn: A civil wrong committed by one person against another, to their property, or reputation • Tort law tries to answer 2 questions: 1) Who should be responsible/liable for human activities? 2) How much does the responsible person have to pay?

Tort law takes form of: Plaintiff (Injured party) vs. Defendant (Wrongdoer) • If plaintiff proven right will be issued a remedy (something to make up for what was lost) usually in the form of damages by wrongdoer. • Civil law requires you to act w/ reasonable care toward other people and their property or they may sue you in court for damages ($). By making you pay $ hopefully you won’t do it again…

• Big question of tort law -> what is reasonable behavior? A) Defendant unreasonable behavior is called a wrongful act when it violates their duty to others by: 1) Doing something they’re not supposed to do (Ex: punch someone) 2) Failing to do something they’re supposed to do (Ex: stop at a stop sign) 3) Doing something you’re allowed to do but doing it in careless manner that endangers others (Ex: driving over the speed limit)

B) Legal Process - The 2 parties can meet and discuss how the injured person should be compensated-the agreement between them is a settlement. * 90% of tort cases filed in court are settled without a trial* - If can’t agree injured party can sue and go to trial-this takes 1 yr or more between filing case and going to trial…

C) What is Tort Law based on? 1) Common Law-> law made by judges through court decisions, which become precedents used to decide future cases 2) State statutes (ex: state’s motor vehicle code)

D) Types of Torts 1) Intentional wrong -> when a person acts with the intent of injuring a person, their property, or both…ex: you’re angry at your friend and smash their mailbox, they can sue you for damages 2) Negligence -> unintentional tort; happens when a person’s failure to use reasonable care causes harm…Ex: drunk driver hits pedestrian, driver is negligent… 3) Strict liability-> applies when the defendant is engaged in an activity so dangerous that there is a serious risk of harm even if they are careful. Ex: building being demolished and brick falls on your head.

*3 groups who face strict liability * 1) Owners of dangerous animals 2) People who engage in highly dangerous activity 3) Manufactures/Sellers of dangerous products

**Remember** Intentional torts may also be crimes. The defendant can be prosecuted by the state as well as sued by the plaintiff. And, * Not all injuries to you or your property will lead to a recovery -> defendant may be too poor to pay you the plaintiff.

• Tort law is civil law: Law that deals with disputes between individuals or groups of individuals… (Unlike criminal law where the city, state, or federal government brings charges, not individuals) • Civil cases are usually easier to win, requiring only that more than 50% of the weight of the evidence be in favor of the winning party… • Why so easy? Because penalty is less severe in a civil action than those guilty of a crime ($, not jail…)

Who can be sued? Anyone, but plaintiff try to sue defendants with lots of money or “deep pockets”: 1) Employers can be sued for torts committed by employees (they have more $) forcing them to be careful while hiring… 2) Children can be sued, but usually their parents are (they have more $); forcing them to look after their kids better 3) Class Action -> a lawsuit brought by one or more persons on behalf of a larger group. (Ex: town gets sick from polluted water; settlement gets divided among the group)

A) Liability Insurance - Contract, or agreement, whereby the insured person agrees to make payments (called premiums) to the insurance company and the co. to pay for damages caused by the insured person. - Who uses it? Manufactures, car and home owners, doctors, lawyers, professionals, etc. esp. for malpractice suits -> lawsuits brought by clients or patients who claim that a professional person provided services in a negligent manner…

B) Workers Compensation Compensates employers who are injured on the job…business owners either: 1) make contributions ($) to state fund, or 2) buy insurance for it. Employees get some $ while unable to work in exchange for not suing their employer. *All of this pending you weren’t: A) Intoxicated on the job B) Breaking safety rules *If you get injured on the job this is your exclusive remedy > you can’t sue for additional damages…

A) Intentional Torts -> once its proven you can sue to collect: 1) Compensatory damages -> award compensates for harm caused by the defendant; can include lost wages, pain, and suffering, etc. 2) Nominal damages -> token amount, symbolic awards of money, used when no substantial loss took place; Ex: $1 (no harm) 3)Punitive damages -> awarded to plaintiff to punish the defendant for malicious, willful, or outrageous acts.

B) Torts that Injure Persons 1) Assault and Battery (both crimes and torts) - Battery -> act intended to cause harmful or offensive contact with another person Ex: making fist and punching someone in the face - Assault - > threat or attempt to commit battery, putting victim in fear of harm, ex: making a fist and waving it at someone *Defense of this Tort* 1) consent, plaintiff agreed to the act in a written, spoken, or assumed manner. Ex: boxing match… 2) privilege, excuses defendant because his/her own interests required it, Ex: self-defense.

C) Torts that Harm Property - Torts law protects property: by not allowing interference w/ your property and by protecting your property from being taken/damaged. 1) Real Property -> your land, house, crops, fence, etc. Torts (wrongdoings) against it: -trespassing -> when a person goes onto another’s property without permission (even if no damage occurred) you can sue to protect your “exclusive” right to the property… -nuisance -> unreasonable interference with the use and enjoyment of your property; courts balance usefulness of activity vs. harm caused; (Ex: neighbors playing loud music e very night…) If you win this suit you can put an injunction (requires person to do/not do an act)

*In general you are not liable if a trespasser is injured on your property * The Exception: Children! • You must take “reasonable care” to eliminate dangerous conditions on your land where children might trespass, this law is called attractive nuisance doctrine (used esp. by construction co. ’s on sites)… • If you own a business you must apply this safety rule to everyone who might come in store, Ex: wet floor signs…

2) Personal Property -> property that can be moved, i. e. cars, clothing, appliances. Tort against it: -Conversion (in criminal terms burglary) when someone unlawfully exercises control over the personal property of another person… - You can use “reasonable force” to protect property but NOT DEADLY FORCE!! That can only be used in self-defense or to protect another person…

D) Negligence Tort law establishes standards of care/ conduct that society expects from people, failure to do this is negligence…esp. if you put someone at an unreasonable risk of harm… 1) duty -> defendant (wrongdoer) owed a duty of care to the injured person. 2) breach of duty -> duty was violated by defendant’s conduct 3) causation -> defendant’s conduct caused plaintiff harm (physical/ emotional) 4) damages -> plaintiff suffered actual damages (economic)

*Defenses for Negligence* 1)Contributory negligence -> plaintiff cannot recover from the defendant if their own negligence in any way contributed to the harm they suffered. Ex: Publix has “wet floor sign” you walk over puddle anyway…Publix would use this defense against you. 2) Comparative negligence -> dividing the loss according to the degree to which each person is at fault… Ex: in car accident if your 10% fault, and their 90%, you’d get only 90% of reward, not 100%… 3) Assumption of the risk -> this defense is used when a person (plaintiff) voluntarily encounters a known danger and decides to accept that risk of danger. Ex: hotels have “swim at your own risk” signs by pools w/no lifeguards, you drown they use this defense…

E) Strict Liability (a. k. a. liability w/out fault) the defendant is liable to the plaintiff regardless of fault. Applied to: 1) Dangerous activities -> are unreasonable dangerous when they involve a risk of harm that cannot be eliminated even by reasonable care. Ex: demolition, no amount of care can totally eliminate risks… 2)Animals -> traditionally law has held owners strictly liable for harm caused by untamed animals…For household pets: owner is liable if knew or should have known that the pet was dangerous or destructive…also some states have leash laws, requiring pets to be kept under owners control/on leash in public places…

3) Dangerous products (a. k. a. product liability law) harm caused by dangerous products, esp. defective products can cause manufacturer to be sued. * Courts held manufacturers strictly liable for harm caused by their products -> producing incentives to make products safe* ex: testing, warning labels, etc … *Defenses for strict liability* - very few; best strategy is to make plaintiff prove their damages; as a plaintiff you do have to prove causation and damages; in product liability, manufacturers can try to prove misuse of their product by consumer or failing to follow clear safety warnings; some courts expect manufacturers to anticipate misuse and still make product safe. * For all strict liability cases: * -> must prove causation and damages. -> people who conduct dangerous activities must accept responsibility, even if not negligent.

1) Amt. of $ awarded to plaintiffs is sometimes unreasonably high (ex: millions) 2) Going to civil court is too expensive 3) Civil court take too long to resolve disputes 4) Complicated cases make it difficult to determine who’s at fault 5)Injured party should get some compensation for their loss, even if the other party was at fault-(remember now if you lose get zippo, nothing)

- The people give the govt. its power! The power we give the govt. is found in the Constitution… - Its two goals? : 1) Define the powers of govt. 2) protect individual rights of people - It makes sure govt. doesn’t become too powerful by: 1) Three separate branches, all equal!!! 2) Checks and balances- where each branch keeps the other in check…

• The ability of judicial branch to declare an act of Congress or the president- unconstitutional • Constitution is supreme law of land- no law can be made, or action taken, which violates the constitution…If it’s found to be the courts can challenge it, strike it down…

- An independent judiciary makes decision based on law, not outside influences- not influenced by Congress, the President, or public opinion. -> Federal judges appointed by President and confirmed by Senate, usually for life… -> This makes it final protector of rights and liberties.

US Courts 2 separate court system: federal established by Article III of Constitution hear cases that relate to the U. S. Constitution, federal laws and regulations, and treaties state established by state constitutions hear cases concerning the state and everything/ everyone within it

-Three levels of courts 1) U. S. District Courts - courts of original jurisdiction, hear both criminal and civil cases - 94 of these-all states have at least 1 - in the federal courts civil trials have 6 persons in jury, 12 in criminal juries or 1 judge! 2) U. S. Circuit Courts of Appeals - courts of appellate jurisdiction - if not satisfies with decision of district court, come here… - 13 of these, covering several states - 3 judge panel

3) U. S. Supreme Court - highest court in land - 9 judges, presided over by chief justice - hears appeals from U. S. Circuit Courts of Appeals and cases dealing with federal questions - have “discretionary jurisdiction”- can decide which cases to hear unlike #2 USCCOA; usually less than 150 of the 7, 000 cases asked to review - Once they rule on a constitutional issue, their decision is final unless: 1) A constitutional amendment is passed to overturn its decision 2) The Supreme Court decides to overrule a previous decision 3) If it interprets an act of Congress, Congress may alter their decision by changing the law.