A tort, in civil law, refers to a negligent or intentional act and a civil wrong which causes harm to another party. Therefore, the legal definition of tortfeasor refers to individuals who commit such wrongful acts. The injured parties in torts are allowed by law to seek recompense or restitution. To further explore this concept, please consider the following clearer legal definition of tortfeasor:
Legal Definition of Tortfeasor A tortfeasor, according to law, refers to an entity or individual who commits a civil wrong, or tort, for which the law allows the injured party to seek relief.
Tort law is derived from both statutory law and common law. Its goal is to provide relief for individuals and entities that have been harmed as a result of civil wrongdoing. Tortuous conduct, therefore, refers to the committing of a civil wrong/tort. …show more content…
c) Strict Liability Torts
According to the legal definition of tortfeasor, these torts refer to acts that cause damage - regardless of intent, fault, and the care taken by the wrongdoer.
However, it is important to understand that tortuous conduct doesn’t include wrongs that were committed through a breach of contract. Contract law, which is a separate category in civil law, governs breach of contract/trust issues.
The damages that a tortfeasor might be held liable for are not limited to medical expenses and physical injuries. Often, tortfeasor liability might include reparations and/or payment for emotional distress, property damage, monetary damages and/or violations of civil rights and privacy.
The liability will, therefore, follow a variety of such wrongful acts as false imprisonment, environmental pollution, infringement of intellectual property rights and copyright, product liability, defamation of character, and vehicle and other
Click here to unlock this and over one million essaysShow More
Compensation involves monetary awards and can be difficult to decide the proper amount of compensation to make the plaintiff whole. In some instance the compensatory damages may seem too far exceed the actual loss of the plaintiff. In addition to over compensation to the plaintiff, another concern is how lawyers are paid for their services. The perception is that lawyers make to much money compared to the plaintiff. Many people, politicians, and companies believe that tort system is defective and requires reform to bring the system more in line with the original intent of tort
Liability for negligence is a civil matter. In liability negligence, the victim has to be able to prove that the defendant has legal obligations, and the obligations was breached, and that they have received foreseeable harm as a consequence of the negligence alleged. If the victim can prove that there was a breach of a legal obligation then he/she will be awarded damages based on the basis of the harm caused or loss sustained.
A tort is wrongful interference against a person or property, other than breaches of contract, for which the courts can rectify through legal action. The reform effort is aimed at reducing the number of unnecessary lawsuits that burden the court system while still allowing injured parties compensation when they’ve been wronged. This latest effort at tort reform has given rise to the same spirited rhetoric that might be found in a courtroom.
These interests are violated by the intentional torts of assault, Battery, trespass, False Imprisonment, invasion of privacy, conversion, Misrepresentation, and Fraud. The intent element of these torts is satisfied when the tortfeasor acts with the desire to bring about harmful consequences and is substantially certain that such consequences will follow. Mere reckless behavior, sometimes called willful and wanton behavior, does not rise to the level of an intentional
Tort is a word developed to describe in general the different types of claims that are normally imposing economic and financial losses that are because of some kind of misbehavior, apart from breach of contract. The term is used to refer to this type of claims, false presentations, fraud, breach of contract, encouragement, unfair competition, trade name and trademark infringement and interference with business relationships (Emanuel, S.
The McIntyre vs. Balentine is one of the landmark cases in the United States because of its contribution to the adoption of a system of modified comparative fault in Tennessee. Based on this system, a plaintiff may receive compensation for damages where his/her fault is less than the defendant’s fault. Notably, the recovery of damages by the plaintiff is lessened to reflect his/her extent of fault. In situations involving several tortfeasors, a plaintiff’s recovery of damages is valid so long as his/her fault is less than the total fault of all tortfeasors (“Comparative Fault & The Empty Chair”, n.d.). The lawsuit was determined on the basis of contributory negligence doctrine and comparative negligence. The application of these doctrines as fueled by the need to determine the essential difference in the fault or legal duty between a party or non-party and negligent tortfeasor.
Law of Torts is a civil wrong and is an unreasonable interference with the interests of others. Law of Torts provides protection against harmful conduct, it attempts to provide an impartial set of rules for resolving private disputes over claims of improper interference with individual rights. A common denominator of each Law of Tort is a failure on the defendant’s part to exercise the level of care that the law deems due to the plaintiff, and the normal remedy for this is unliquidated damages. Negligence is one of these Torts, it is an independent tort as it is an element for other torts. Negligence is causing loss by failure to take reasonable care when there is a duty to do so. To succeed in an action for negligence the plaintiff must prove on the balance of probabilities that the defendant owed the plaintiff a duty of care to avoid
The tort of negligence is the failure to exercise the standard of care that a reasonable person would exercise in a similar circumstance. Negligent conduct may consist of either an act, or an omission to act when there is a duty to do so. Four elements are required to establish a prima facie case of negligence. The existence of a legal duty to exercise reasonable care, a failure to exercise reasonable care. Cause in fact of physical harm by the negligent conduct; physical harm in the form of actual damages and proximate cause. Which is showing that the harm is within the scope of liability.
Tort law is it intentional or is it unintentional, how do you know? Tort law is “A body of rights, obligations, and remedies that is applied by courts in civil proceedings this is to provide relief to those who suffered harm from the wrongful acts of others” (The Free Dictionary). The word tort is a french word meaning a wrong and a tort is classified as intentional or unintentional. Tort law is used for a party who is injured to bring a civil lawsuit against the defendant or wrong doer. The party who sues can receive a monetary reward for damages that occurred to the person who brought the civil lawsuit onto the wrong doer.
Tort reform is very controversial issue. From the plaintiff’s perspective, tort reforms seems to take liability away from places such as insurance companies and hospitals which could at times leave the plaintiff without defense. From the defendant’s perspective, tort reform provides a defense from extremely large punitive damage awards. There seems to be no median between the two. Neither side will be satisfied. With the help of affiliations such as the American Tort Reform Association and Citizens Against Lawsuit Abuse, many businesses and corporations are working to change the current tort system to stop these high cash awards.
Victim restitution is when the offender of a crime is ordered by the justice system to reimburse a victim for harm or damages done. Reimbursement can be sought by victims for expenses related to medical expenses, therapy costs, prescription charges, counseling costs, lost wages, legal expenses, insurance deductibles, crime-scene clean up or repair, and lost or damaged property. All state level courts and the federal court system have various means in which victims can purse restitution (National Center for Victims of Crime, 2004). Some jurisdictions require victims’ who wish to seek compensation for damages as a result of crime, do so as a civil action against the offender, while other jurisdictions include restitution as part of the sentencing
A tort action is a lawsuit against a police officer who violates an individual’s constitutional right. Compensation is typically required by victims because of the injuries they suffered whether mentally or physically. These proceedings or torts can be carried through state and federal level. When reviewing Anderson v. Creighton, I believe the federal officers should be held accountable for their unlawful entry. The immunity given to these officers exceeded the jurisdiction in which they conducted their unlawful
From the 1990s, the reports that cover the compensation cases increased dramatically in the mass media (Almond, 2004). There is a view that a huge number of tort cases in the ‘compensation culture’ are unjustified and unfair. In the mid-1990s, the term ‘compensation culture’ first appeared in a famous British newspaper (Levin, 1993). Actually, this is an extreme view, which will be criticized in this paper. This essay emphasizes the compensation culture is a myth (Morris, 2007). There are three reasons: Firstly, the data of the tort claims declined in recent years. Secondly, some victims do not receive the compensation or enough compensation that they deserve. Thirdly, the mass media and public organizations created the ‘compensation