Torts-Negligence
There are several different types of torts. The most common tort that you may have some contact with is that of negligence. Negligence is a failure to exercise ordinary care.
The concept of negligence is founded upon the idea that a duty is owed from one person to another and there has been a breach of that duty, which then causes an injury or damage to another party. For instance, in the red light example, the duty owed was the duty of not running a red light. If that duty is violated by running the red light and as a result of that you are injured, then all of the elements of a negligence claim have been met.
There are four essential elements to any tort claim.
1. There must be a duty that is owed by the defendant (the party against whom the claim is made) to the plaintiff (the party bringing the claim).
2. There must be a breach or violation of that duty by the defendant.
3. That breach of duty must have then been a proximate cause of injury to the plaintiff.
4. There must be actual injury or damage to the plaintiff.
The first two elements of any tort claim—duty and breach of duty—have just been discussed. The third element of any tort claim is that of proximate cause. Proximate is not to be confused with the term approximate. Proximate literally means “immediate to, contiguous, touching, or direct.” Approximate means not proximate. A proximate cause of an event is one that is reasonably foreseeable. If a person runs a red light, then it is reasonably foreseeable that he or she may injure someone. As such, that negligence may be a proximate cause of injury.
Example: Suppose Alan is playing a game of catch with his son in front of his house. His wind-up is a bit too aggressive and he overthrows the ball. The ball goes through the front window of your home and then through the rear window of your home striking a barbecue stove that is on your back porch. The stove then falls off the back porch, rolls down the hill, and kills another neighbor. What is Alan responsible for?
The first question is whether Alan was negligent. Alan probably was negligent for throwing the ball so hard that it broke the front window of your home. The next question is whether that negligence was a proximate cause of injury to your home. Clearly it was.
The final question is whether or not that negligence was a proximate cause of injury to your neighbor. That is a tougher question. It comes down to essentially an issue of whether it was reasonably foreseeable that by throwing the ball as hard as he did, it would not only go through your front window, but also the back window, and then strike your barbecue oven, knock it off the back porch, cause it to roll down the hill, and strike your neighbor. That type of resulting injury is probably not reasonably foreseeable, and as such, the chain of causation would have been broken at some point in that sequence of events. Typically, in that type of case, the question of proximate cause would be submitted to a jury for resolution as to whether or not Alan’s negligence was a proximate cause of injury to your neighbor.
The fourth and final element of any tort claim is that of damages or injuries incurred. To justify a recovery of any substantial amount, the injuries or damages must be more than minimal. Those injuries may include medical expenses, lost wages, pain and suffering, humiliation, etc.
