Intentional Tort Law

1027 Words3 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: Research essays on the concept of tort

Torts A tort is a wrong. More precisely, a tort is a violation of a duty imposed by the civil law. When a person breaks one of those duties and injures another, it is a tort. The injury could be to a person or her property. In a tort case, it is up to the injured party to seek compensation. She must hire her own lawyer, who will file a lawsuit. Her lawyer must convince the court that the defendant breached some legal duty and ought to pay money damages to the plaintiff. A crime is an act so threatening that the government itself will prosecute whether the injured party wants the case to go forward. A district attorney, who is paid by the government, will bring the case to court seeking to send the defendant to prison. If there is a fine, …show more content…

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 …show more content…

Intentional infliction of Emotional Distress; The intentional infliction of emotional distress results from extreme and outrageous conduct that causes serious emotional harm (Samuelson, 2016). An example of intentional infliction of emotional distress is an angry employee decides to get even with a fellow co-worker for a perceived injustice by telling the co-worker he has been having an affair with the co-worker’s wife for several months, a lie, but convincing enough to cause doubt. This lie eventually causes many arguments, accusations and a separation between the plaintiff and his wife. The defendant caused intentional infliction of emotional distress, because his actions were considered to be an outrageous thing to do, and the serious emotional harm that was caused to both plaintiffs.

References
Tort, law, (n.d.) Intentional torts, Referenced http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Intentional+torts
Kelly/Warner, (2017). Business defamation; standards and legal advice, Referenced http://businessdefamation.com/.
Huessner K. M. and Kim S. (2012). Anonymous posters to pay 13 million for Defamatory comments. Referenced http://abcnews.go.com/Business/jury-awards-13-million-texas-defamation-suit-anonymous/story?id=16194071
Samuelson, Beatty (2016). Introduction to business law, Intentional torts, pages 122-125

Advance fee scams, (n.d.) Scams and Safety, Referenced

Show More
Related

  • The Burden of Proof in the Case of Darling vs. Charleston Community Memorial Hospital

    734 Words  | 2 Pages

    ...ulations in the U.S. judicial system is “most define the law as a system of principles and processes by which people in a society deal with disputes and problems, seeking to solve or settle them without resorting to force” (p. 15). Some situations cannot be rectified in a board meeting. However, negligence is in the category of objectives of tort law, it is also the most popular lawsuit pursued by patients against medical professionals against doctors and healthcare organizations (Bal, 2009). Objectives of Tort Law

    Read More

  • The Pros And Cons Of Negligence

    887 Words  | 2 Pages

    A series of events unfolded when George, running late for class, parked his car on a steep section on Arbutus drive and failed to remember to set the parking brake. The outcome of not remembering to set the parking brake caused many issues resulting in scrapping a Prius, breaking through fencing, people on the train sustaining injuries, and finally a truck that jack-knifed and caused a 42-car pileup. Could the parties that were injured, from George’s actions, be recovered from under the negligence theory? To understand if George is negligent, it is best to look at the legal issue, the required elements of negligence, the definition and explanation of each element of the case, and finally to draw a conclusion to determine if George is negligent.

    Read More

  • Whether V Jumping Out Of The Window Broke The Chain Of Causation?

    743 Words  | 2 Pages

    ….Where the conduct of the accused induces in the victim a well-founded apprehension of physical harm such as to make it a natural consequence that the victim would seek to escape and the victim was

    Read More

  • tort of negligent investigation

    1025 Words  | 3 Pages

    As police officers own right to carry out an investigation on the suspect, public arise concerning on negligent investigation. In the Hill v. Hamiton-Wentworth case, Mr. Hill was accused robbery and then was proved innocent. Mr. Hill filled a lawsuit against police officers on the tort of negligent investigation, and the Supreme Court of Canada dismissed Hill’s appeal. Moreover, a majority of the court recognizes there is a tort of negligent investigation in Canada, but Mr. Hill was investigated under code of care and no tort of negligent investigation during his investigation. While the argument of minority believes the tort of negligent investigation should be recognized in Canada, and the police had been negligent, the argument of minority is more compelling than majority.

    Read More

  • Krinsky V. Doe Summary

    528 Words  | 2 Pages

    Due to a growing amount of media platforms that allows the public to exercise free speech, defamation about a public-figures and or corporate reputation can suffer damages. In the case Krinsky v. Doe, former president, chief operating officer and chairman of a Florida-based drug service company, Lisa Krinsky sues for defamation against ten anonymous individuals for posting “scathing verbal attacks” on a Yahoo’s message board. The dispute arose in 2005 when ten anonymous individuals posted the following comments on an internet blog: "a management consisting of boobs, loser(s) and crook(s)," "I will reciprocate felatoin [sic] with Lisa even though she has fat thighs, a fake medical degree, 'queefs' and has poor feminine hygiene." The comments

    Read More

  • J Pearson's Intentional Infliction Of Emotional Distress

    484 Words  | 1 Pages

    What is “Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress?” (Medway 34) That is when a person “intentionally or recklessly engages in extreme and outrageous conduct that intends to cause, and causes severe emotional distress to another” (34) C.J Pearson is guilty of the charges of “Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress” for harassing Alex Billings. C.J Pearson is guilty without a doubt for two reasons, he intended to cause emotional distress through his MyFace postings, and that Alex Billings suffered severe emotional distress due to Pearson’s harassment. C.J Pearson intentionally caused emotional distress to Alex Billings during his MyFace postings.

    Read More

  • Intentional Tort

    1806 Words  | 4 Pages

    This essay focuses on intentional tort, which includes trespass to person consisting of battery, assault and false imprisonment, which is actionable per se. It also examines protection from harassment act. The essay commences with a brief description of assault, battery and false imprisonment. It goes further advising the concerned parties on the right to claim they have in tort law and the development of the law over the years, with the aid of case law, principles and statutes.

    Read More

  • Negligence Case Study

    935 Words  | 2 Pages

    Negligence, as defined in Pearson’s Business Law in Canada, is an unintentional careless act or omission that causes injury to another. Negligence consists of four parts, of which the plaintiff has to prove to be able to have a successful lawsuit and potentially obtain compensation. First there is a duty of care: Who is one responsible for? Secondly there is breach of standard of care: What did the defendant do that was careless? Thirdly there is causation: Did the alleged careless act actually cause the harm? Fourthly there is damage: Did the plaintiff suffer a compensable type of harm as a result of the alleged negligent act? Therefore, the cause of action for Helen Happy’s lawsuit will be negligence, and she will be suing the warden of the Peace River Correctional Centre, attributable to vicarious liability. As well as, there will be a partial defense (shared blame) between the warden and the two employees, Ike Inkster and Melvin Melrose; whom where driving the standard Correction’s van.

    Read More

  • Assault Battery And Crime Essay

    1113 Words  | 3 Pages

    after suffering harm from the acts of the other party (Turner, 2013). A tort is a civil wrong

    Read More

  • Crime is a contested and complex concept. Discuss

    820 Words  | 2 Pages

    Crime is some action/omission that causes harm in a situation that the person/group responsible ‘ought’ to be held accountable and punished irrespective of what the law book of state say.

    Read More

  • Victim's Rights: Why Do Laws Protect the Criminal More than the Victim?

    2532 Words  | 6 Pages

    A criminal is obviously an individual who commits a crime, but what is crime? A crime is any act or omission of an act in violation of a public law. Though most laws are common throughout America, some laws are also established by local and state governments as well. Criminal laws and penalties vary from state to state. Crimes include both felonies and misdemeanors. Felonies are serious crimes like murder or rape and are punishable by imprisonment for a year or more. The consequence for felonies such as murder and treason can be the death penalty. Misdemeanors are less serious crimes like petty theft or speeding and are punishable by less than a year in prison. Fines are also punishments of both misdemeanors and felonies. The fine’s amount is determined by the seriousness of the case. However, no act is a crime unless it has been stated as such by an American law or statute.

    Read More

  • Intention In The Case Hyam V DPP (1975)

    1780 Words  | 4 Pages

    Intention in criminal law is when an individual consciously decides to behave in a particular manner to achieve a certain desired result and in doing so commits a crime. It is the highest form of mens rea as someone who intentionally sets out to commit a criminal offence is typically more culpable then an individual who has behaved in a reckless manner, which has consequently resulted in a crime. Intention can be further split into two categories; these are direct intention and oblique intention.

    Read More

  • Liability for Omissions in Tort Law

    882 Words  | 2 Pages

    There is a strict distinction between acts and omissions in tort of negligence. “A person is often not bound to take positive action unless they have agreed to do so, and have been paid for doing so.” (Cane.2009; 73) The rule is a settled one and allows some exceptions only in extreme circumstances. The core idea can be summarized in “why pick on me” argument. This attitude was spectacularly demonstrated in a notoriously known psychological experiment “The Bystander effect” (Latané & Darley. 1968; 377-383). Through practical scenarios, psychologists have found that bystanders are more reluctant to intervene in emergency situations as the size of the group increases. Such acts of omission are hardly justifiable in moral sense, but find some legal support. “A man is entitled to be as negligent as he pleases towards the whole world if he owes no duty to them.” (L Esher Lievre v Gould [1893] 1 Q.B. 497) Definitely, when there is no sufficient proximity between the parties, a legal duty to take care cannot be lawfully exonerated and imposed, as illustrated in Palmer v Tees Health Authority [1999] All ER (D) 722). If it could, individuals would have been in the permanent state of over- responsibility for others, neglecting their own needs. Policy considerations in omission cases are not inspired by the parable of Good Samaritan ideas. Judges do favour individualism as it “permits the avoidance of vulnerability and requires self-sufficiency. “ (Hoffmaster.2006; 36)

    Read More

  • Natural Crimes and Legal Crimes

    1071 Words  | 3 Pages

    Legal crimes are an act that violates the law in itself but is considered legal given the situation. For example; killing someone in self defense violates the law, however; murder in itself is a crime, but protecting one's life if threatening by bodily harm or injury is legal. Therefore, killing in self defense is a legal crime. Legal crimes are acts that are not harmful to another person, however; these acts are defined as crimes by society because of the influence these crimes have on those who are in authority. Legal crimes are less serious because they cause less harm, are not as frequent and are not as widespread. People who commit assault, fraud, embezzlement, vandalism, prostitution, and disorderly conduct are committing legal crimes. Legal crimes are not an obvious crime and do not have an obvious victim. However, not all crimes are reported to the police, therefore crimes are classified by the degree of harm caused, how frequent they occur, and how pervasive the crimes are throughout the country. Crimes can be distinguished by degree or severity of the crime by dividing the crimes into groups; felonies for severe crime and misdemeanors for less severe crimes. Another way to distinguish crime is between mala in se which is rape or murder or mala prohibita, which is trespassing, gambling, or prostitution. Once the public understands that the balance is the goal of "justice" the next step is to understand the difference between a natural crime and a legal crime.

    Read More

  • Contrasting Criminal Law and Civil Law: A Comparative Analysis

    743 Words  | 2 Pages

    Criminal law refers to rules and statues that define conduct prohibited by the government because it endangers society. It prohibits and punishes wrongful actions. The plaintiff is the prosecutor who files the complaint and the defendant is the individual or organization who have appeared to broken the law. The purpose is to deal with the disputes between individuals and/or organizations, in which compensation is awarded to the victim. Almost always a jury is involved, who is a group of peers determining whether or not the accused is guilty.

    Read More

More about Intentional Tort Law

Open Document