Civil Lawbreaking: Illegal Or Not?

Civil law deals with behaviour that constitutes an injury to an individual or other private party, such as a corporation. Examples include defamation, breach of contract, negligence resulting in injury or death, and property damage. Criminal law, on the other hand, deals with behaviour that is or can be construed as an offence against the public, society, or the state—even if the immediate victim is an individual. Examples include murder, assault, theft, and drunken driving. While breaking civil law is not considered illegal, it can still result in penalties and consequences such as financial compensation or an order to change behaviour.

Civil law vs criminal law definitions

Civil law and criminal law are two distinct bodies of law that serve different purposes and handle different types of cases.

Criminal Law

Criminal law deals with behaviour that is considered an offence against the public, society, or the state, even if an individual is the immediate victim. Criminal acts include murder, assault, theft, and drunken driving. Criminal cases are initiated by the government, which files charges against the accused, referred to as the defendant. The government must prove the defendant's guilt "beyond a reasonable doubt" to secure a conviction. The punishment for criminal offences can include imprisonment, fines paid to the government, or both.

Civil Law

Civil law, on the other hand, pertains to behaviour that results in an injury or harm to an individual or private entity, such as a corporation. Examples of civil cases include defamation, breach of contract, negligence resulting in injury or death, and property damage. In civil cases, a private party, known as the plaintiff, files a lawsuit against the defendant. The plaintiff must establish the defendant's liability by providing a "preponderance of evidence". The consequences of losing a civil case typically involve monetary compensation or the return of property, but do not include imprisonment.

Key Differences

The key differences between civil and criminal law lie in the initiating parties, the decision-makers, the types of punishment, the standards of proof, and the legal protections afforded to the accused. Criminal cases are prosecuted by state officials, while civil cases are brought by private individuals or organisations. Criminal cases are often decided by a jury, whereas civil cases are usually decided by a judge. Criminal law aims to punish or reform offenders, while civil law seeks to compensate the victims of wrongdoing. Criminal law requires a higher standard of proof, with "beyond a reasonable doubt" being the threshold, whereas civil law operates on a "preponderance of evidence" standard. Finally, criminal law provides more robust legal protections to defendants, including constitutional rights against unreasonable searches and seizures and compelled self-incrimination.

Conduct at issue

Civil law deals with behaviour that constitutes an injury to an individual or other private party, such as a corporation. This includes defamation (libel and slander), breach of contract, negligence resulting in injury or death, and property damage.

A civil case is a private, non-criminal lawsuit, usually involving private property rights, including respecting rights stated under the Constitution or under federal or state law. For example, lawsuits involving breach of contract, probate, divorce, negligence, and copyright violations.

A civil case starts when a person or entity (the plaintiff) claims that another person or entity (the defendant) has failed to perform a legal responsibility owed to the plaintiff. The plaintiff may ask the court to tell the defendant to fulfil the obligation, or make compensation for the harm, or both. The plaintiff must inform the defendant about the complaint filed against them, this is called "service of process".

The complaint describes the plaintiff's damages or injury, explains how the defendant caused the harm, shows that the court has jurisdiction, and asks the court to order relief. A plaintiff may seek money to compensate for the damages, or may ask the court to order the defendant to stop the conduct that is causing the harm.

To summarise, the conduct at issue in civil law involves behaviour that causes harm or injury to a private party, individual, or entity. This can include a range of issues, from defamation and breach of contract to negligence and copyright violations. The key factor is that the conduct results in harm or injury that can be addressed through legal action, often involving monetary compensation or orders for the defendant to stop the harmful conduct.

Statute of limitations

A statute of limitations is a law that defines the maximum amount of time in which parties involved in a dispute must initiate legal proceedings following an alleged offense. The statute of limitations varies depending on the nature of the offense and the location of the jurisdiction. Statutes of limitations apply to both civil and criminal cases.

In the context of civil law, statutes of limitations are important for several reasons. Firstly, they encourage plaintiffs to file lawsuits in a timely manner. Secondly, they relieve those involved in disputes from retaining evidence indefinitely. Finally, they provide clarity and prevent endless litigation.

The duration of a statute of limitations for civil cases varies depending on the specific scenario and the state in which the case is being filed. For example, in Florida, civil suits have different time frames than criminal cases, and there are additional variations within these categories. For instance, wrongful death cases have a shorter statute of limitations than debt collection cases.

• In Florida, medical malpractice and wrongful death cases have a statute of limitations of two years.
• In Texas, individuals have a maximum of two years to file a claim for damages related to medical malpractice. Additionally, any health care liability claim must be filed within 10 years from the date of the act or omission.
• In California, most felony-level sex offenses have no statute of limitations, but certain specific rape scenarios under Penal Code 261(a)(5) still have a time limit.
• In Colorado, the statute of limitations for rent-related disputes is six years, while it is two years for tortious breach.
• In Ohio, the statute of limitations for real property cases is four years, while it is two years for personal property cases.

It is important to note that the statute of limitations for civil cases can vary significantly across different states, and there may be exceptions or special circumstances that apply. Therefore, it is always advisable to consult with an attorney to understand the specific statute of limitations for your particular case and state.

Who can initiate a case

In the United States, civil law deals with behaviour that constitutes an injury to an individual or other private party, such as a corporation. Civil cases are initiated by a private party (the plaintiff) who files a complaint with the court and "serves" a copy of the complaint on the defendant. The plaintiff may seek monetary compensation for damages or may ask the court to order the defendant to stop the conduct causing harm. The plaintiff must pay a filing fee, but this can be waived if they are unable to pay.

In contrast to criminal cases, where only the federal or state government (the prosecution) may initiate a case, civil cases can be brought against an individual or entity, including a governmental organisation or business.

Civil cases often involve money, but they can also involve asking the court to stop a person or business from doing something (an injunction) or asking the court to make an order that sets out the obligations and rights of each party (declaratory relief).

In California, civil cases are divided into two main categories: unlimited civil cases (for over $35,000) and limited civil cases ($35,000 or less). Lawsuits for $12,500 or less can be filed in small claims court, and there is no limit to how much can be sued for in small claims court when it comes to COVID-19 rental debt.

Appealing rulings

In the United States, the losing party in a decision by a trial court in the federal courts is normally entitled to appeal the decision to a federal court of appeals. However, a popular misconception is that cases are always appealed. Usually, there must be a legal basis for the appeal—an alleged material error in the trial—not just the fact that the losing party didn't like the verdict.

In a civil case, either party may appeal to a higher court. The party appealing is called the appellant, or sometimes the petitioner. The other party is the appellee or the respondent. The appeal is instituted with the filing of a notice of appeal. This filing marks the beginning of the time period within which the appellant must file a brief, a written argument containing that side's view of the facts and the legal arguments upon which they rely in seeking a reversal of the trial court. The appellee then has a specified time to file an answering brief. The appellant may then file a second brief answering the appellee's brief.

The appellant presents legal arguments to the panel, in writing, in a document called a "brief". In the brief, the appellant tries to persuade the judges that the trial court made an error, and that its decision should be reversed. On the other hand, the appellee tries to show why the trial court decision was correct or why any error made by the trial court was not significant enough to affect the outcome of the case.

The appellate court determines whether errors occurred in applying the law at the lower court level. It generally will reverse a trial court only for an error of law. Not every error of law, however, is cause for a reversal. Some are harmless errors that did not prejudice the rights of the parties to a fair trial. For example, in a criminal case, a higher court may conclude that the trial judge gave a legally improper instruction to the jury, but if the mistake were minor and, in the opinion of the appellate court, had no bearing on the jury's finding, the appellate court may hold it a harmless error and let a guilty verdict stand. However, an error of law, such as admitting improper evidence, may be determined to be harmful and therefore reversible.

After a case is orally argued or otherwise presented for judgment, the appeals court judges will meet in conference to discuss the case. If the appeals court affirms the lower court's judgment, the case ends, unless the losing party appeals to a higher court. The lower court decision also stands if the appeals court simply dismisses the appeal (usually for reasons of jurisdiction).

If the judgment is reversed, the appellate court will usually send the case back to a lower court and order the trial court to take further action. It may order that a new trial be held, the trial court's judgment be modified or corrected, the trial court reconsider the facts, take additional evidence, or consider the case in light of a recent decision by the appellate court.

Frequently asked questions