About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

1 1 (August 13, 2019)

handle is hein.crs/govbatd0001 and id is 1 raw text is: ICongressiona Research Service ~~inftormig thelegishtive debate since 1914 0 August 13, 2019 Introduction to Tort Law Questions regarding the appropriate scope and content of tort law have often provoked debate inside and outside of Congress. This In Focus surveys basic tort law principles and identifies pertinent legal considerations for Congress. What Is Tort Law? Tort law is the body of rules concerned with remedying harms caused by a person's wrongful or injurious actions. For instance, if a surgeon tasked with amputating a patient's left leg commits medical malpractice by instead amputating her right leg, that patient may be able to pursue a tort lawsuit for monetary damages against the surgeon. Traditionally, with a few significant exceptions, tort law has primarily been a matter of state rather than federal law. Tort law has also historically been a matter of common law rather than statutory law; that is, judges (not legislatures) developed many of the fundamental principles of tort law through case-by-case adjudication. Over time, however, state legislatures and Congress have begun to intervene in the development of tort law to a greater extent. Why Does Tort Law Exist? Tort law serves at least three purposes. The first is to compensate plaintiffs who are injured by a defendant's conduct. The second is to deter persons from acting in ways that may cause injury to others. A third purpose- albeit one of somewhat lesser significance-is to punish people who wrongfully injure others. Negligence Perhaps the paradigmatic example of a tort is negligence. For example, a motorist who causes a fatal collision by looking at his cellular phone instead of the road may have committed a tort by driving negligently. To establish a defendant's negligence, a plaintiff must ordinarily prove all four of the following elements: * The defendant owed a duty to the plaintiff. (Different defendants may owe different duties depending on the circumstances. For instance, whereas motorists owe a duty of reasonable care to not injure pedestrians and other drivers, doctors generally owe their patients a stricter duty to abide by the standard of care and prudence prevailing in the medical community.) * The defendant breached that duty. (For instance, a defendant may breach his duty of reasonable care by acting carelessly.) * The plaintiff suffered a legally cognizable injury. Whereas a plaintiff may ordinarily sue a defendant for personal injury or property damage, courts have generally been less willing to entertain negligence claims alleging pure economic losses like lost revenues. The defendant's breach of his duty caused the plaintiff's injury. The plaintiff must prove not only that the defendant actually caused his injury-that is, that the injury would not have occurred but for the defendant's breach-but also that the defendant proximately caused his injury-that is, that the causal connection between the defendant's breach and the plaintiff's injury was sufficiently direct as a matter of public policy. (Typically, a defendant is responsible only for injuries it could reasonably anticipate and not those that are unforeseeable or remote.) Notably, under certain circumstances, a defendant may be liable for negligence committed by a third party. For instance, under the doctrine of respondeat superior, an employer may be liable for torts committed by its employees. To illustrate, if an employee negligently causes a vehicular collision while driving a company car on company business, that driver's employer may be liable to persons injured in the crash. The employer will ordinarily not be liable, however, for torts an employee commits outside the scope of his employment. Strict Liability and Products Liability Whereas negligence is chiefly concerned with whether the defendant acted carefully or carelessly, strict liability torts impose liability without regard to the defendant's level of care. One prominent example of a strict liability tort is products liability, which permits a plaintiff injured by a defective product to recover damages from the seller of that product without having to prove that the seller acted negligently. Instead, generally speaking, a products liability plaintiff only needs to prove that * the defendant sold a product; * the defendant was a commercial seller of such products; * the product was in a defective condition at the time the defendant sold it; * the plaintiff sustained an injury; and * the defect actually and proximately caused the injury. Courts have identified several rationales for subjecting commercial sellers to strict liability, including the fact that a business entity is often in a better economic position to bear https:crs reports cong tess go

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline.

Purchase Access

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most