Tort Law–Criminal Law Versus Civil Law

Apart from legislation granting a right to sue for a specific harm, personal injury law generally consists of tort law and the civil procedure for enforcing it. Law is sometimes divided into civil law and criminal law. This article discusses the distinction between civil law and criminal law as it relates to tort law and personal injury.

Criminal Law

Criminal law is the law that generally provides protection to the government and each person from those who would intentionally harm that society. Besides the fact that crime is usually an act or omission that it is inherently evil, a crime is an act or omission that cannot be condoned or tolerated without endangering everyone. The punishment for a crime is usually a fine or imprisonment.

Civil Law

Although criminal law tends to dominate headlines in the media, there are far more civil laws than there are criminal laws.

Unlike criminal law and its concern with intentional harm to society, civil law generally provides for the legal relationships between persons, organizations, and the government. Tort law is a kind of civil law. Tort law generally provides protection to each person from harm not intended to harm society as a whole. The result of a violation of tort is usually becoming liable to pay for the damages that are caused to the victim.

An Example of the Distinction Between Criminal Law and Civil Law

Suppose you know a person who is a “party animal.” Suppose that the person has a little too much to drink at a party, is found intoxicated at the wheel of a car, and is arrested for drunk driving. Suppose that the person pleads guilty, and as part of the person’s punishment, the person’s driver’s license is suspended.

Now suppose that you know a second person whose best friend recently died. Suppose that the second person, still in mourning for the death of the best friend, inadvertently drives through a red light, crashes into another car, and severely injures the driver of the other car. Suppose that the second person’s insurance company pays for the severe injuries that are caused to the other driver, and that the second person’s punishment for running a red light is to pay a small fine.

Why is the first person, who seemingly caused no harm to anyone, not allowed to drive, while the second nice person, who caused severe harm to another, allowed to drive? Because the first person’s crime, drunk driving, is deemed to much more seriously endanger society as a whole than the second person’s crime, running a red light.

Why did the second person’s insurance company have to pay money to the injured driver on behalf of the second person, while the first person’s insurance company wasn’t even involved? Because the second person committed a tort, and the first person did not. Unlike criminal law, which protects society as a whole, tort law protects each individual person who is harmed. If there is no harm to an individual, as in the case of the first person, there is no liability under tort law.

Attorney Profiles
- Martin E. Pulverman Raymond J. Pulverman
Leave Us a Review on Google
Client Reviews

Leave Us a Review on Lawyers.com
Our Office
- 1307 State Street
  Second Floor
  
  Santa Barbara, California 93101
  Phone: 805.259.3581
RECENT VERDICTS AND SETTLEMENTS
- $4,375,772 Arbitration award to a man severely injured as a pedestrian after being abandoned on the side of Highway 101 at 2 a.m. He was struck and injured 20 minutes later by a hit and run motorist and lost a leg and survived a lengthy coma. His arbitration award was against his girlfriend who was negligent for abandoning him on the side of the road. She disputed any liability and blamed him for being drunk. The award was reduced by 50 percent because of his intoxication.
- $3,204,934 Verdict for a man who sued an insurance company for its unreasonable refusal to settle his claim for $100,000 (policy limits). The jury determined that the insurance company acted in bad faith and the court entered a judgment for the injured plaintiff. $2,200,000 Action against international cruise line for injuries suffered on an on-shore excursion based on negligent supervision of the shore excursion provider.
- $2,000,015 Mediated settlement for a man who suffered a crushed foot in a head-on collision in the desert. $2,000,000 Jury verdict for a female motorist hit by a truck on US 101. She sustained fractures to her pelvis, femur, tibia and fibula requiring surgery. $2,000,000 Recovered for a motorcyclist who was hit by a truck and sustained orthopedic and traumatic brain injuries.
- $1,250,000 Mediated settlement for a man injured in a motorcycle accident causing a broken foot, clavicle and punctured lung. Dispute over the extent of the injuries complicated by a previously undiagnosed diabetic condition. This represented the policy limits. $1,187,704 verdict on behalf of a bicyclist who sustained shoulder, knee and rib injuries by a truck driver who violated the bicyclist’s right of way.
- $1,100,000 Settlement for a man who was rear-ended by an underinsured motorist with a $25,000 liability policy. An additional $1,075,000 was recovered under the underinsured motorist policy. $1,010,866 A pedestrian walking out of a store in San Luis Obispo is struck by a motorist entering a parking space hitting the gas instead of the brakes causing a broken leg.
- $1,000,000 Mediated settlement for a man with a fractured pelvis injured in a freeway collision with a driver carrying minimum limits of coverage ($15,000). An employer paid an additional $735,000 for a total policy limit of $750,000. An additional $250,000 was recovered in underinsured motorist benefits (policy limits). $1,055,000 Mediated settlement for a young woman who suffered a fractured knee in the parking lot of an oil change service facility. $1,100,000 settlement for a motorcyclist who sustained a fractured tibia, fibula and ribs when he was struck by a car exiting a driveway. $1,100,000 settlement for a woman who sustained a mild traumatic brain injury as a passenger in a single car collision. $1,051,250 Plaintiff/passenger suffered a fractured femur from a high speed rear end collision. Plaintiff/driver suffered lacerations from flying glass. Defendant contended he suffered a seizure and alleged the sudden unanticipated emergency defense and was diagnosed with epilepsy.
- $815,000 Settlement for a man who suffered a herniated disc with an underinsured drunk driver who paid $15,000. An additional $800,000 was recovered under an underinsured motorist policy. $500,000 Mediated settlement for policy limits for a woman who broke her hip in a rear-end accident. The defense contended the injury existed before the accident and initially offered $51,000.
- $410,645 Mediated settlement in a motorcycle crash causing a rotator cuff injury. Disputed over pre-existing medical conditions. $235,000 Mediated settlement for a woman who slipped and fell on water at an auto dealership near a water fountain. $74,277 Verdict for a woman injured in an intersection accident. Dispute over the force of impact. The defense offered $30,000 forcing a trial. The court also awarded $28,547 in costs.
- $600,000 Settlement for a woman who sustained a shoulder injury in an intersection collision with a driver who ran a red light.
- $1,000,000 settlement for a motorcyclist who injured his leg by a car pulling out of a parking lot. $1,000,000 settlement for a motorcyclist who injured his leg by a car exiting a shopping center parking lot. $1,000,025 recovered for a woman who injured her shoulders and arms in an intersection crash.