business law assignment 4
March 7th, 2023
The Questions (Submit the below in one Word document please):
- How is a Crime different than a Tort?
- Compare Intentional Tort and Negligence.
- What is the relationship between Breach of Duty and Standard of Care?
- In Strict Liability cases, why does the Defendant try to convince the Court that it is a Negligence case and not a case of Strict Liability?
Answer:
Please find the requested answers below:
- Crime vs. Tort: Crime refers to an offense against society that is punishable by law, whereas a tort is a civil wrong that causes harm or loss to another person and can result in a legal liability. The key difference is that crimes are prosecuted by the state, while torts are typically litigated by individuals seeking compensation for damages.
- Intentional Tort vs. Negligence: Intentional torts involve actions that are done purposefully to cause harm or injury to another person, such as assault, battery, or defamation. Negligence, on the other hand, refers to actions or omissions that breach a duty of care owed to another person, resulting in harm or injury. The key difference is that intentional torts require intent, while negligence only requires a breach of duty.
- Relationship between Breach of Duty and Standard of Care: Breach of duty refers to a failure to meet the standard of care owed to another person, resulting in harm or injury. The standard of care refers to the level of care and caution that a reasonable person would exercise in a similar situation. The relationship between the two is that a breach of duty occurs when the standard of care is not met.
- Defendant’s strategy in Strict Liability cases: In strict liability cases, the defendant may try to convince the court that it is a negligence case rather than a case of strict liability because in negligence cases, the plaintiff must prove that the defendant breached a duty of care owed to them, while in strict liability cases, the plaintiff only needs to prove that the defendant caused the harm or injury. By arguing that the case is one of negligence, the defendant may be able to shift some of the burden of proof onto the plaintiff.