About the Download

Tort law has been the subject of possible reform discussion for several years. Tort laws
give an individual or group of individuals the right to sue for damages that occur from another’s
wrongdoing. The question of reform is considered when individuals try to go over and above
what is considered customary damages or compensation. Individuals who seek to reform tort
laws normally have their own agenda whether the guidelines should be tightened or relaxed
(“Does tort,” 2012).
Tort Law
Torts are criminal acts or civil wrongs that are recognized by the state and federal
government to be severe enough to warrant a lawsuit. Torts fall into three main categories: strict
liability, which is liability for defective products; intentional torts, which violate another’s rights
or cause harm intentionally; and negligent torts, when damages or injuries are caused by accident
Past and present losses are often included in lawsuits that are based on tort laws. Several
types of loss are applicable when pursuing damages. Medical expenses, lost wages due to a
person’s inability to work because of an injury and pain and suffering are a few of the main
reasons individual’s file lawsuits after they have been injured or declared the victim of a crime.
According to the Huffington Post, tort law is a farce. Not only does it deprive injured
victims from receiving justice, it denies the amount of damages they can collect by placing a cap
on amounts pertaining to non-economic damages such as health-care costs that extend over a
person’s lifetime. Those who are pushing for tort reform are primarily those who would are held
liable and would have to pay damages to a person who has incurred a life changing injury or
other traumatic form of loss. Physicians fall into this category, as do other public service
occupations (Bodine, 2012).
In this respect, the laws are clear. Damages are owed in an amount commiserate to the
loss. Tort reform would cap the amount an individual could receive, while letting the perpetrator
off the financial hook. The case referred to by the Huffington Post discussed a verdict that was
overturned by the Missouri Court of Appeals that “capped” the amount of damages a young boy
was awarded for injuries he received prior to his birth. The appeal was subsequently thrown out
as being unconstitutional and full damages were reinstated (Stevens, 2012).
Laws in this respect are still relevant and little reform is needed. While no amount of
money can truly compensate the loss of a life, arm or leg, damages should be arrived at
dependent on the circumstances of the individual and the cause of the injuries, intentional or
The Tort System in 10 Years
Reform within the tort system will eventually occur, but not in the way many will think.
Under current stipulations, exorbitant amounts can sometimes be claimed and awarded within
the constraints of the law. Tort reform, such as placing uniform “caps” on judgments has deemed
unconstitutional because often times, the injuries are caused under drastically different
If tort reform is to be effective and longstanding, changes must be made that limit the
excessively large judgments and allow the claims to be made against a just formula where the
amount of compensation is equal to that which is necessary to maintain adequate care and cover
reasonable expenses (Weinrib, 200). In 10 years, it is possible the tort system will still be
fluctuating between the two concepts in an attempt to reach an amicable settlement.
Tort law provides injured parties to hold another person liable for injuries caused either
intentionally or unintentionally. The concept of tort reform, more often than not, seeks to reduce
the amount of damages and liability a person can claim in such a lawsuit.

Save For Later

has been added to your cart!

have been added to your cart!

You must log in and be a buyer of this download to submit a review.