The person who brings the lawsuit is called the "plaintiff," and the person who is sued is called the "defendant."
The plaintiff in a tort case is typically the party who claims to have suffered harm or injury as a result of the defendant's actions. They initiate the lawsuit by filing a complaint and seeking compensation or damages for their losses.
If a judge has not made a decision, the plaintiff and their attorney can drop, or settle, the tort. However, once a judge has made a decision, the judge's decision is upheld by law, and the plaintiff has no say.
The Erin Brockovich case involved a tort claim known as toxic tort. The residents of Hinkley, California, suffered harm due to environmental pollution caused by Pacific Gas and Electric Company, leading to health issues. Erin Brockovich played a crucial role in representing the victims in their legal battle for compensation.
No, the defendant does not have to have "intent" to be held liable for a tort. The plaintiff only has the prove that damages were caused and that the defendant caused them. Whether the defendant caused them intentionally or negligently is, usually, irrelevant.
a wrongful act by the defendant, legal remedy, legal damage to the plaintiff
In civil and tort cases, the "complaining" party is referred to as the PLAINTIFF. In criminal cases the plaintiff's place is taken by the PROSECUTION. In both civil and criminal cases the DEFENDANT is the person, or party, against whom the case is being brought.
Question is unclear. Are you looking for the word TORT? Torts are civil wrongs, as opposed to criminal offenses, for which there is a legal remedy for harm caused.
trespass to chattels
In a criminal case it is the accuser. In a civil case - think Judge Judy - it is the Plaintiff
malicious prosecution,i would say, is an action for damages against the plaintiff by the defendant on various grounds....but solely out of malice,ill-will,spite....when i mentioned various grounds i meant that they were just excuses that the defendant used to prosecute the plaintiff whereas in fact his main reason was malice. here,the plaintiff and defendant can be old enemies or even competetors in the industrial realm or otherwise.Also, this case of malicious prosecution will not be justified by facts....rather it will be a a case brought about just to injure he plaintiff.
The first name in a case is the side that is bringing the case and is either the plaintiff or the prosecution.
the plaintiff was Texas.
The burden usually lies on the plaintiff to prove the elements of their case. However, there is the principal of res ipsa loquitor, which flips the table and requires the defendant to prove they were not negligent.