b. Desired Results. In a tort case, the basic purpose is to compensate the one
who suffered the loss as the result of another's conduct. The law seeks to place the
cost on those who, reflecting our concepts of justice, ought to bear it. It also seeks to
prevent future losses and harms by regulating behavior. By making people accountable
for their actions, the law exerts a deterrent effect. In a criminal case, the law goes
further, and seeks to punish the offender, reform the offender, protect society from any
further criminal acts by the offender, and deter the offender (and any others similarly
inclined) from engaging in such acts in the future. In a criminal case, the wrongdoer
faces more than having to pay damages to the one he injured. The offender may also
face a criminal fine and imprisonment.
c. Different Standards of Proof. In a tort case, the one who brings the action
must prove his case by a preponderance of the evidence. This means that the fact-
finder must be convinced that the plaintiff's version of the facts is more likely to be true
(as opposed to defendant's version). In a criminal case, the state must prove guilt
beyond a reasonable doubt, which is a much higher standard. There is a higher
standard for criminal cases because the sanction is much more severe. In a criminal
case, the offender is facing a severe stigma and a possible loss of liberty. An example
is assault and battery; this is a tort, as well as a crime. Another example is the crime of
larceny (its tort equivalent is "conversion"). In other words, some torts involve conduct
that is so serious to the interests of society that it also constitutes a crime. An individual
can be prosecuted by the state for the crime and also by the individual for the tort. This
isn't a double jeopardy issue, since we aren't talking about successive criminal
prosecutions here.
1-4.
TYPES OF TORTS
a. Intentional Torts.
(1) lntent. This isn't necessarily a hostile intent or an intent to do anyone
harm. It is, rather, the intent to do an act that invades the interests of someone else.
Tort liability extends to the consequences desired and those that are reasonably
foreseeable. Think of it this way--if I force you to receive medical treatment you didn't
want, the fact that I was only trying to do what was good for you isn't the point. I may
create tort liability even though I wasn't trying to hurt you.
(2) Voluntary act by the defendant. An act one is forced to perform does not
normally result in tort liability (where is the intent to invade the interest of another?). If
you have the intent, but no act, you have intent in a vacuum. We don't make that intent
legally actionable (besides, even if we did" how would you ever prove it?). An
intentional tort comes into being when you proceed to try to carry out that intent.
(3) Torts against the person or against property. Intentional torts can be
against the person or against property.
(a)
Against the person.
MD0033
1-4