Learning about the three major categories of torts in the AIPS paralegal certificate program
Many students that complete the AIPS paralegal certificate program continue on to complete advanced classes. There are a variety of advanced specialty certificates and advanced classes such as Advanced Torts. The Advanced Torts class places a special emphasis on investigation, negligence and special negligence actions, defenses to negligence, intentional torts with injuries to persons and property, defenses to intentional torts, strict liability, products liability, special tort actions and tort immunities. So let’s examine the three major categories of torts to understand what is involved in the advanced torts class in the AIPS paralegal certificate program.
A tort is a civil wrong, other than a breach of contract, for one can seek relief in a court law. It isn’t a crime or a breach of contract. There are three major torts: negligence, intentional torts and strict liability torts. Most lawsuits involve negligence. The elements of negligence are duty, breach of duty, proximate cause and harm. The duty is the obligation to use reasonable care to avoid injuring the plaintiff and if one fails to do so, there is a breach of that duty. The proximate cause is the legal responsibility of bringing something about and there must be a harm which is the actual loss or damage that results from the failure to use reasonable care.
Intentional torts include torts against the person such as assault, battery, false imprisonment, and infliction of emotional distress. There are also intentional torts against property such as trespass to land. Generally, an intentional tort occurs when a person specifically desires to injure the plaintiff or knows that the injury is substantially certain to result from one’s act, but engages in the act anyway.
Strict liability torts apply when a person has engaged in an inherently dangerous activity such as keeping wild animals. A person who engages in this conduct is subject to liability of any harm, regardless if they took great care to prevent this harm. The plaintiff doesn’t have to prove that the defendant acted unreasonably as in a negligence case or with the intent to cause harm.