tort

(redirected from Torts)
Also found in: Dictionary, Thesaurus, Medical, Legal, Encyclopedia.
Related to Torts: Intentional torts

tort

a civil wrong. The laws of tort are general laws which protect the personal rights of an individual to non-violation of his or her property, reputation and person:
  1. offences against property rights include trespass; negligence (where there is a breach of a legal duty to take care which results in unintended damage to the plaintiff); and nuisance (where there is an unlawful and unreasonable interference with a person's use or enjoyment of his or her property);
  2. offences against reputation include libel, and slander (making a false and malicious statement which damages another person's reputation);
  3. offences against one's person include assault, battery; negligence; and intimidation (a threat to perform an unlawful act interfering with the victim's freedom of action).

It may be noted in this context that an employer may be made liable for the torts of his employees which are committed during the course of their employment, having vicarious liability for their actions. In a tort action the plaintiff will usually be seeking either financial compensation (damages) for harm done to him or her by the defendant, or an injunction from the court ordering the defendant to discontinue harming the plaintiff.

tort

A legally recognized wrong for which the law provides a remedy.The wrong may be negligent;it might be one of the intentional torts such as defamation, assault, battery, trespass, conversion (broadly, acts that amount to theft), or false imprisonment (preventing someone from leaving a place);or it might be something that can combine elements of negligence,recklessness,or intentional conduct,such as fraud or nuisance.The modern trend of legal theory is to expand concepts of tort liability. As a result, older decisions that find in favor of a property owner, for example, and against someone injured on the property may no longer be reliable when you are trying to determine rules of conduct and the limits of responsibilities.The better practice is to do all things reasonable and fair under the circumstances,regularly consult with insurance advisors regarding risk management practices, keep informed regarding litigation trends in your industry, and always maintain adequate insurance coverage.

References in periodicals archive ?
Analyses of the first issue have provided strong evidence that limitations on tort liability reduce the frequency of claims and the size of claims (Browne and Puelz, 1999; Browne and Schmit, 2008; Paik, Black, and Hyman 2013).
With respect to the data structure in tort reform studies, there have been a number of articles examining the effect of liability reforms using either state-level data (Blackmon and Zeckhauser, 1991; Viscusi et al., 1993) or firm-level data from the NAIC database (Born and Viscusi, 1994, 1998; Viscusi and Born, 1995, 2005).
Although the content of reforms varies greatly across states (e.g., the stringency of a cap is determined by the level and type of the cap), almost all of these articles quantify tort reform by using binary variables equal to 1 for all the years in which reforms are effective, and 0 otherwise (excepting Hyman et al., 2009, who study the impact of various caps).
In place of a mens rea inquiry, the Right of Way Law inquires whether the injury was caused by the driver's "failure to exercise due care." (34) This is a common definition of tort negligence, (35) and tort negligence is not a mens rea element.
(44) Rather, a preponderance of the evidence standard would suffice, as in tort. (45) Even if courts do not ultimately adopt this burden-shifting interpretation, the effort to use it illustrates a comfort with a tort-like regime for right-of-way violations.
Notably, even Right of Way Law opponents use tort concepts to argue against the statute, showing how deeply ingrained tort concepts are in the social understanding of traffic crashes.
After the forms of action were abolished by the Judicature Acts between 1873 and 1875, waiver of tort survived in situations of implied contract and extinctive ratification.
Jackson v Penfold illustrates the application of waiver of tort under both implied contract theory and extinctive ratification within the context of a bailment.
That he sold them wrongfully is wholly immaterial--the bailor, on discovering that its bailee had disposed of its property, had the option of insisting on a tort having been committed and suing in trespass and trover; or it might waive the tort and claim the sale-price.
Although Calabresi drew on interpersonal comparisons to justify the importance of risk aversion in the market for insurance or commensurate tort liability, economic theory and evidence demonstrate that one need not resort to an interpersonal comparison of utility.
An aspect of Calabresi's discussion that is of less concern in the current economy is the role of tort when there are monopolies.
The nature of tort liability's risk-spreading relationship can be illustrated by considering the situation of a manufacturer of a potentially defective product.