Intentional torts are civil wrongs defined by the actor’s or tortfeasor’s intent. Negligence is similar but can manifest without intent on the part of the actor. The lines between intentional torts and negligence can blur easily, especially if you have limited knowledge and familiarity with tort law.
So what exactly is the difference? And how should you approach a legal issue that leaves you injured or harmed because of another’s action or inaction?
Getting the Help of a Lawyer
Assuming you’ve been injured as a result of someone else’s actions or inaction, a personal injury lawyer is going to be your best resource, both to determine what type of case you might have and to represent you throughout that case. As a layperson, you aren’t expected to have any legal knowledge whatsoever, so a trained legal professional is going to be indispensable in helping you pursue action against whoever harmed you.
With your lawyer, you’ll go over the details of your case, discuss possible options moving forward, and decide on a course of action. This course of action will likely vary depending on whether your case is an intentional tort or a negligence case.
Intentional Torts vs. Negligence: Key Differences
Intentional torts and negligence do have some similarities. A tort is essentially a civil wrong, which, unlike a criminal wrong, means two independent parties will be involved in the dispute. In a criminal case, one of the parties is the state.
However, there are some big differences between intentional torts and negligence. There are many different intentional torts, all of which involve an intentional action on the part of the tortfeasor, a legal term referring to the person who took the action. Negligence, on the other hand, represents a violation of reasonable care. In other words, the person responsible for negligence may not have intended the action or the consequences that followed it, but they still engaged in a way that violates expected norms or rules.
In a negligence case, it’s essential to prove four separate individual elements:
- Existence of a duty. Initially, you must prove that there was some kind of duty in play. The person responsible for negligence must have owed a duty of care through their actions or inaction.
- A breach of duty. Next, you must prove that there was a breach of this duty. In simple terms, it means the person did not do what they were supposed to or that they did something they weren’t supposed to.
- A causational link. It’s also necessary to show proximate cause in a negligence case. This means you must demonstrate that the action or inaction was responsible for the harm.
- Damages (harm). And, of course, you must objectively prove that there was harm. You must show that there were damages as a direct result of breaching this duty.
Intentional torts and negligence vary in a few key ways:
- Intentionality. The biggest difference is intentionality. In intentional torts like battery, assault, and false imprisonment, it is necessary to show that the defendant intentionally committed some action against you. In negligence, no intention is necessary; instead, you merely have to show the four elements of negligence.
- Coverage. There are many discrete intentional torts, each of which has different definitions and circumstances in which they apply. For example, a battery is an intentional contact that causes harm or offense to the defendant. False imprisonment, also an intentional tort, is depriving someone of their liberty without adequate legal justification. Negligence, in contrast, covers a wide range of actions and responsibilities in a much broader set of circumstances.
- Burden of proof. The burden of proof is also different for intentional torts and negligence. Negligence can be tricky, as you must prove all four elements individually. However, the burden of proof for an intentional tort is higher, as you must demonstrate intention on the part of the tortfeasor.
- Damages. The calculation for damages can be complicated with both intentional torts and negligence. However, generally, intentional torts are associated with greater damages, which could be interpreted as a punitive measure to discourage such intentional activities. If you have an intentional tort case, you could be entitled to more compensation.
If you’ve suffered an injury or damages as a result of someone else’s actions or inaction, you may have a legal case against them, and you may be entitled to compensation. However, this may be an intentional tort or negligence, and the circumstances will dictate which it is.
If you’re ready to move forward with legal action, or if you need some more information, contact a personal injury attorney, who will likely have experience with both intentional torts and negligence.
