In California, your right to file personal injury claim begins the moment you sustain injuries by someone’s negligence – whether the store owner neglected to repair a wobbly stairs, or you were deliberately attacked by nightclub security. While both scenarios create a path to financial compensation, intentional infliction of injury can result in dual liability for the perpetrator – both civil and criminal.
What Is Intentional Tort?
Intentional torts are acts that are carried out with the clear intention of causing harm.
- Assault and threat of violence
- Physical abuse (battery)
- Defamation and slander
- Intentional infliction of emotional distress
- Destruction of property (vandalism)
According to the California Supreme Court ruling in Tate v. Canonica (180 Cal.App.2d 898): “Intent exists when the perpetrator either desired the harmful consequences resulting from their actions or was certain that their actions would lead to such consequences.”
The California legal system carefully makes this distinction because different motives require different legal responses. While negligence is treated as a failure requiring monetary compensation, intentional harm is seen as a serious violation of social norms that warrants criminal sanctions as well.
What Is Considered Negligence in California Law?
Negligence in the California legal system is defined as the failure of an individual or entity to take the steps of care that a reasonable person would take in the same situation, thereby causing harm to another person. This is not just a simple mistake, but a legally recognized omission that can have serious consequences.
Proving Negligence vs. Intentional Misconduct in Personal Injury Cases
When filing a personal injury case for an injury in California, you, as the victim (plaintiff), bear the burden of proof. This means you must present sufficient evidence to support your claims in order to receive compensation. In civil law, the standard of proof is the “preponderance of the evidence”—your claims must be more likely true than not true.
To successfully prove negligence, you must provide clear and convincing evidence of four key elements:
- The defendant had a legal obligation to act reasonably and carefully toward you. For example, drivers have a duty of care to drive safely and follow traffic laws.
- The defendant breached duty of care. For instance, a driver using their phone while driving violates their duty of care toward other road users.
- The defendant’s breach of duty directly caused your injury. There must be a clear connection between their actions and your harm.
- You suffered actual, measurable damages as a result of the accident. This includes medical expenses, lost wages, physical pain, and emotional distress.
Unlike negligence, proving intentional harm requires establishing the defendant’s awareness and intent. The plaintiff must demonstrate that the defendant was aware of their actions and either intended or knew that those actions would result in harm. For instance, in the case of physical assault, it must be shown that the individual consciously intended to make contact or create fear of injury.
Actual damages—such as physical injuries, emotional distress, or property damage—must be documented. Evidence can include threatening messages, witnesses who heard threats, or recordings of aggressive behavior. In such cases, California courts often award punitive damages in addition to compensatory damages.
Main Differences Between Intentional Torts Vs. Negligence
| Characteristic | Negligence | Intentional Torts |
| Intent | No intent; harm results from carelessness | Clear intent to cause harm |
| Examples | Car accidents, medical malpractice | Assault, vandalism, theft, battery |
| Proof | Focus on breach of duty of care | Focus on conscious intent to cause harm |
| Type of Compensation | Primarily compensatory damages | Both compensatory and punitive damages possible |
Insurance and Civil Rights In Negligent vs. Intentional Acts
Intentional misconduct and negligence have different legal consequences which also impact insurance coverage. While insurance policies typically cover acts of negligence, such as car accidents, they often exclude coverage for intentional torts. This means that actions carried out with deliberate intent to cause harm are usually not protected under standard insurance policies.
Injuries sustained due to negligence or intentional act can be linked to civil rights laws, especially in situations where willful harm is motivated by discrimination. For example, racial harassment in the workplace can result in additional claims under human rights laws, including punitive damages. These compensations not only compensate for the damage suffered but are intended to punish the perpetrators for malicious behavior and to deter future discriminatory actions. California laws, such as the Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA), provide a framework for implementing such requirements.
Were You Harmed By Another’s Neglect or Intentional Harm?
When someone intentionally causes you injury or property damage in California, the legal system offers double protection. In civil proceedings, you can seek compensation that covers all your expenses – from medical bills and lost wages to property damage and emotional distress. In civil proceedings, you can seek compensation that covers all your expenses – from medical bills and lost wages to property damage and emotional distress.
However, unlike cases that include negligence, intentional damage often leads to criminal proceedings. The state may prosecute the offender independently of your civil lawsuit, which may result in a prison sentence, probation, or heavy fines.
Skip to content