Also known as: tort law · laws of tort · torts
Written by attorneys — see sources below.
A body of principles that determine when conduct subjects an actor to civil liability for harm to legally protected interests of another.
Lucia Lopez operated a loading dock and failed to secure a barrier after noticing a hazard. The barrier collapsed and injured a worker. The omission subjected Lucia to liability under tort principles because her conduct met the criteria for tortious action.
Layla Lane served as trustee of a family trust that owned a warehouse. A visitor slipped on an unrepaired floor and sued. Layla escaped personal liability because she was not personally at fault in administering the trust property.
Lila Lin, age sixteen, drove a delivery van for a summer job and struck a pedestrian. The court applied an adult standard of care because operating a motor vehicle constitutes an adult activity.
Lucas Lee owned land in one state and caused runoff damage to neighboring property in another state. The court selected the law of the state with the most significant relationship to the land and parties to decide the tort claim.
Lola Langley’s twelve-year-old son threw a rock through a neighbor’s window. The court refused to impose liability on Lola solely because of the parent-child relationship and required proof of her own negligent supervision.
Lance Lee was subjected to an unlawful search by federal agents acting without a warrant. He brought a direct action against the agents for violation of his constitutional rights arising under tort principles.
On the morning of November 26, 1965, agents of the Federal Bureau of Narcotics entered Webster Bivens's apartment in the Bronx. The agents broke open the door, handcuffed Bivens in front of his wife and young children, and thoroughly searched the apartment. They then transported Bivens to the federal courthouse in Brooklyn, where he was interrogated, booked, and subjected to a visual strip search. Several days later Bivens was released on his own recognizance, and he was never indicted or prosecuted for any offense. Bivens filed suit in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York against the six agents in their individual capacities. His complaint sought fifteen thousand dollars in damages from each agent and alleged that the arrest and search were effected without a warrant, that unreasonable force was employed, and that the arrest was made without probable cause. Bivens claimed to have suffered great humiliation, embarrassment, and mental suffering as a result of the agents' conduct. The District Court dismissed the complaint on the ground that it failed to state a cause of action. The United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit affirmed the dismissal. The Supreme Court of the United States granted certiorari to review the judgment.
View caseNo. The law of torts reaches both intentional conduct and negligent omissions when the actor’s behavior subjects the actor to liability under governing principles.
A trustee faces personal liability only when personally at fault for the tort committed during trust administration.
Children remain liable for their torts but are held to a standard that accounts for age and experience unless the minor engages in an adult activity.
Parents are not vicariously liable merely by virtue of the parent-child relationship. Liability requires the parent’s own negligence as a proximate cause.
Yes. Individuals may pursue tort claims directly against federal agents for constitutional violations arising from official conduct.
…Law, 67 Mich. L. Rev. 127 (1968): Note, Artificial Insemination and the Law, 1968 U. Ill. L. F. 203. : W. Prosser, The Law of Torts 335-338 (4th ed. 1971); 2 F. Harper & F. James, The Law of Torts 1028-1031 (1956); Note, 63 Harv. L. Rev. 173 (1949). : See cases cited in Prosser, supra , n. 63, at 336-338;…