Negligent Tort
Negligent Tort Negligence is neglect or disregard. Tort is a legal misgiving. Negligent tort is a type of tort in the legal system. The concept encompasses that of which an occasion where an individual’s “acts leading to injury are neither expected nor intended.” (Yell, 1999) In this paper, the elements of a negligent tort, the concepts of proximate causation and duty of care, and types of remedies for finding tort liability will be explored.
Elements of Negligent Tort There are three elements of negligent tort. The first element is that of which the defendant had a responsibility of support and/or care to the plaintiff. For example when an individual puts a child in a car, they have a responsibility to secure them appropriately and drive applicably as to avoid any unnecessary dangers to the full extent of their capability (like not driving 120 mph). The second element is that the defendant did not complete this obligation. To continue with the previous example – once the individual takes the responsibility of transporting the child (with due reason that they will secure the child and drive reasonably) and fail to do so, this is the second part of finding negligent tort. The third element of this is “that this breach was the actual and proximate cause of injury experienced by the plaintiff.” (Barnes, Bowers, Langvardt, & Mallor, 2010, p. 206)
Proximate Cause Proximate causation “concerns the required degree of proximity or closeness between the defendant’s breach and the injury it actually caused.” (Barnes, Bowers, Langvardt, & Mallor, 2010, p. 225) Proximate cause would mean that the reactions caused by a defendants actions may still not make the defendant 100% liable for what happens – only what can be directly correlated to his/her actions and leaving them free of indirect consequences. This action can also be used in insurance type cases. It has been discussed that if a professional driver has an accident, the company that
Elements of Negligent Tort There are three elements of negligent tort. The first element is that of which the defendant had a responsibility of support and/or care to the plaintiff. For example when an individual puts a child in a car, they have a responsibility to secure them appropriately and drive applicably as to avoid any unnecessary dangers to the full extent of their capability (like not driving 120 mph). The second element is that the defendant did not complete this obligation. To continue with the previous example – once the individual takes the responsibility of transporting the child (with due reason that they will secure the child and drive reasonably) and fail to do so, this is the second part of finding negligent tort. The third element of this is “that this breach was the actual and proximate cause of injury experienced by the plaintiff.” (Barnes, Bowers, Langvardt, & Mallor, 2010, p. 206)
Proximate Cause Proximate causation “concerns the required degree of proximity or closeness between the defendant’s breach and the injury it actually caused.” (Barnes, Bowers, Langvardt, & Mallor, 2010, p. 225) Proximate cause would mean that the reactions caused by a defendants actions may still not make the defendant 100% liable for what happens – only what can be directly correlated to his/her actions and leaving them free of indirect consequences. This action can also be used in insurance type cases. It has been discussed that if a professional driver has an accident, the company that
References: Barnes, A. J., Bowers, T., Langvardt, A. W., & Mallor, J. P. (2010). Business Law: The Ethical, Global, and E-Commerce Environment (14th ed.). Boston: McGraw-Hill Irwin. Yell, M. L. (1999, February). Center for Effective Collaboration and Practice. Retrieved December 19, 2010, from What are Tort Laws?: http://cecp.air.org/interact/authoronline/february99/2.htm#2