Most torts are based on a theory of liability called negligence. Other tort theories of civil liability include strict liability and intentional wrongs. For example, a battery is defined as the unlawful or offensive touching of another without their consent which is both a civil wrong and a criminal act.
This article covers the basic types of personal injury cases and their underlying legal basis.
Legal Basis of Personal Injury Cases
Proving Liability – Civil Burden of Proof
To prove the civil act of battery, the plaintiff’s attorney must prove every element of the civil wrong (tort) by a mere preponderance of the evidence or to quantify this means by more than fifty percent. Civil law also describes this standard as more convincing or more likely true than not.
In cases where punitive damages are sought against a defendant to punish and make an example of the defendant, the civil burden is one of clear and convincing evidence.
Negligence
An Act of Carelessness
Negligence is the failure of a person to exercise “reasonable care” in their relationship with others. Accordingly, negligence is measured against what a reasonable person would have done under the same or similar circumstances.
Negligence is said to have occurred when one person harms another due to one’s carelessness. An example of negligence is a typical motor vehicle accident. One driver is careless by not paying attention to current traffic conditions, such as not noticing that the cars in front have stopped.
Causing a collision by rear-ending the vehicle is almost always attributable to the negligent driver. In negligence cases, the person bringing the lawsuit called the plaintiff, who must prove that the defendant was careless and that this carelessness (negligence) was the proximate cause of the injury to the plaintiff.
Burden of Proof
To prove negligence, the plaintiff, who carries the burden of proving her case, must show by a preponderance of the evidence that the defendant acted negligently and that the defendant’s negligence was the legal or factual cause of the injury sustained by the plaintiff. If you are injured or damaged because someone else acted negligently, you may have a cause of action against the person.
Statute of Limitations
Laws concerning personal injury cases differ from state to state. Statutes of limitation prevent lawsuits from being filed after a specific time from the date of the alleged negligence. For example, in California, the statute of limitations for most types of personal injury cases is two years from the accident date.
Failure to timely file your lawsuit before the statutory limit expires results in the total loss of all legal rights to assert their personal injury claims. The plaintiff is said to be legally barred by the statute of limitations
It is, therefore, critical to consult with an attorney as soon as you have been injured.
Strict Liability
Strict liability does not require determining whether the defendant was careless or intended to cause them harm. It is enough to establish that the damage was done and the defendant was the one who did it. In other words, the defendant’s mental state is not essential to prove strict liability.
Public Policy Drives Strict Liability
The legal theory of strict liability is driven by public policy, specifically protecting the general public from harm.
For example, suppose you are remodeling your home and decide to tear down a portion of the structure by using dynamite.
If someone gets injured using that dynamite, the injured party does not have to prove anything other than the defendant’s use of dynamite. This is because, in all states, “dynamite” is considered an ultra-dangerous activity. Consequently, the law imposes a substantial liability against anyone engaged in ultra-dangerous activities, and liability will be imposed irrespective of whether the defendant was careless or did anything wrong in the process.
Defective Product Liability
Product liability is a broad and developing tort and consumer protection law area.
Product liability imposes strict liability for the death or injury caused by a defective product designed, manufactured, distributed, or sold through the chain of commerce.
Consumer Safety Over Profit
Strict liability in product liability cases is intended to protect the general unsuspecting consumer over the manufacturer’s financial interest in not having to add further costs to ensure their product is safe.
The Scope Of Product Liability Law Is Wide
Every organization in the products supply chain is considered strictly liable for the injuries caused by the product. Even if the retail seller had nothing to do with the design or manufacture of the product, such as the supplier and hardware store that sold the defective product to the consumer.
Proving Liability in Defective Product Cases
The consumer needs to prove the following:
- The product sold was defective.
- The defendant either designed, manufactured or sold the defective product.
- The defective product was the factual and legal cause of the consumer’s injuries or death.
Proving The Product Was Defective
Three Ways For A Product To Be Defective:
- Manufacturing defects are those that occur while the product is being manufactured.
- Design defects are those in which the product design is inherently dangerous such as in the Ford Pinto case.
- Defect in failing to adequately warn the consumer of a danger that is not obvious and which could have been avoided with a proper warning.
History Of Punitive Damages In Product Liability Cases
The Ford Pinto Case
Before 1972 a consumer in a product liability case was allowed to recover compensatory damages but could not recover punitive damages. This changed, however, in the notorious Ford Pinto case in which the plaintiffs were awarded $2.5 million in compensatory damages and $125 million in punitive damages.
In this case, the driver and her child were spontaneously engulfed in flames when their Ford Pinto was rear-ended by another vehicle.
The plaintiffs sued based on product liability law and sought punitive damages. What outraged the jury and the public was that Ford executives knew in advance that placing their fuel tank at the far rear of the vehicle would make the car prone to puncture and explode into flames upon impact.
Practical Considerations If Injured By A Defective Product
Assuming the product was defective and resulted in either injury or death, a consumer may be entitled to collect damages to compensate for their injuries.
Preserving The Product Is Critical To The Case
- It is vital to save the product and ensure it is not thrown away or damaged.
- It will be necessary for the plaintiff to have the product as evidence to prove the product was defective and or unreasonably dangerous for the intended purpose.
Manufacturer’s Failure To Warn
Due to newer, more sophisticated technology, a doctrine of “strict liability” has evolved to help protect consumers who rely on a manufacturer’s warnings about the product’s safety.
Under this doctrine, an injured consumer may collect from the manufacturer without proving that the manufacturer was at fault. But instead, the manufacturer should have warned the consumer of the product’s dangerous properties.
Worker Injuries -Third-Party Claims
A third-party lawsuit allows workers to sue outside the worker’s compensation system.
A third-party lawsuit in a worker’s compensation case is when a different party (not your employer) was also a cause of your injuries and was not the sole result of your employer or the employer’s work conditions.
For example, suppose a machinist is severely injured at work resulting from a design defect of the machine he was operating. In that case, the worker still has the legal right to file a separate personal injury claim against the manufacturer and supplier of the defective machine under a product liability theory. This is called a third-party claim, and the defendant, under these circumstances, can be held legally responsible for your injuries and resulting damages under the legal theory of strict liability.
A personal injury claim is litigated separately from a Worker’s Compensation Claim and is prosecuted by a personal injury attorney. This will not prevent one from filing a worker’s compensation claim. Notwithstanding, the law will not permit recovery for the same injury arising from the same accident if it results in double recovery for the plaintiff.
In a personal injury lawsuit, one can recover much more for pain and suffering than under a worker’s compensation claim.
Intentional Torts
Intentional Torts Can Also Be Charged As A Crime
Examples of criminal acts include:
As stated above, these crimes are also considered torts; therefore, under civil law, the complainant (plaintiff) must file a civil lawsuit against the defendant for compensatory damages such as economic and general damages. Also, depending on the extent of aggravating facts, the plaintiff may also recover punitive damages.
Personal Injury Lawyer
If you have questions or require additional information about your legal rights and obligations, consult a verified Personal Injury Lawyer as soon as possible
