Negligence Tort Law Is an

Negligence Tort law is an area that involves almost every aspect of human life and has been described as a harm where the victim goes to civil court in the hopes of receiving some sort of compensation.

One type of tort is called "negligence," and includes "acts committed without intent but in violation of a reasonable person standard…." (Edwards, 2012, p.3) a successful negligence case must involve certain elements and while these elements may be called different names, they must include a duty by which the defendant was to act in a certain manner toward the plaintiff, a breach of that duty by the defendant, proof that the defendant's actions actually caused the plaintiff's injury and that the defendant could have foreseen the harm caused, and finally the plaintiff must show that they were actually harmed, usually physically, by the actions of the defendant.

Without these elements, a negligence case will usually not be successful. The first element of a successful negligence suit is called "duty," and involves a duty by the defendant towards the plaintiff. In other words, this means that the defendant was obligated to act in a certain manner towards the plaintiff." ("Negligence") for a negligence case to be successful, the plaintiff must demonstrate that the obligation was one that any ordinary person would find to exist under the particular situation.

For example, if a patient must decide whether or not to undergo a surgical operation, the physician has a duty to inform the patient of any and all possible side effects or unintentional outcomes. If there is a reasonable chance of paralysis from undergoing the surgery, then the doctor's duty is to inform the patient of this possibility.

If, under this example, the doctor did not duly inform the patient of the reasonable possibility of paralysis by undergoing the surgical operation, then the doctor has committed what is known as "breach of duty." This is the second element required for a successful negligence suit and the plaintiff must demonstrate that the defendant not only had a duty to act in a certain way, by that they violated this duty by not acting in the manner proscribed.

If a doctor knows that a surgical procedure could end in paralysis for the patient, but willingly does not inform the patient of the possibility, then the doctor has clearly breached the duty of informing the patient of all outcomes that could be reasonably expected. "Cause" is the next element needed for a successful negligence suit, but this is probably the most intricate element involved.

The first aspect of "cause" is known as "cause in fact," and involves demonstrating that the defendant's actions, or lack of action, actually caused the harm suffered by the plaintiff. For example, the patient in the case actually suffered paralysis as a result of the surgery. It must be pointed out that the surgeon involved did not perform the surgery ineffectively but that the chance of paralysis was a possible outcome of a successful surgery.

In other words, the negligence was not the surgeon's technique but the failure to inform the patient of the possible outcomes of even a successful surgery. This type of "cause" is known as "proximate cause," or the defendant's failure to foresee the harms that may result through their actions. In this case, the doctor failed to inform the patient that one of the foreseeable outcomes of the surgery was paralysis. Finally, the plaintiff in a successful negligence case must demonstrate legally recognized harm inflicted on the plaintiff by the.