SELECCIÓN DE TEXTOS.

Este trabajo de compilación contiene los

textos que se utilizarán para el dictado de
la materia. Los textos ilustran los distintos
ejes temáticos abordados para la
enseñanza de las técnicas de comprensión
lectora en lengua extranjera

LECTOCOMPRENSIÓN
– INGLÉS
MATERIAL DIDÁCTICO
ALUMNOS
UNIDAD 10

DEPARTAMENTO DE IDIOMAS
 UNIDAD 10:

DERECHO DE DAÑOS

2
 ÍNDICE DE CONTENIDOS

TEXTO 1: A. Tort law: key words

TEXTO 1:B. Tort

TEXTO 2: A. Tort Law vs. Criminal Law (gráficos)

TEXTO 1:B. Tort Law vs. Criminal Law (texto)

TEXTO 3: Interpretación de gráficos y cuadros

TEXTO 4: Cartoon: Humour

TEXTO 5: Hyundai Ordered To Pay $73M In Punitive Damages

In 2011 Crash Case, Liability Lowered By A Third

Apéndice 1:Torts: motor vehicle defect cases

Apéndice 2:: What does “punitive damages” mean?

3
TEXTO 1A: Tort law: key words

Tort Law: KEY WORDS:

TORT LIABILITY WRONG WRONGDOER TORTFEASOR

HARM INJURY DAMAGE RELIEF DAMAGES
REDRESS CAUSATION INJUNCTION NEGLIGENCE
BATTERY ASSAULT TRESPASS
DEFAMATION

4
TEXTO 1B: Tort
Fuente: http://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/tort

Tort
Definition

A tort is an act or omission that gives rise to injury or harm to another and
amounts to a civil wrong for which courts impose liability. In the context
of torts, "injury" describes the invasion of any legal right, whereas
"harm" describes a loss or detriment in fact that an individual suffers.

Overview

The primary aims of tort law are to provide relief to injured parties for
harms caused by others, to impose liability on parties responsible for the
harm, and to deter others from committing harmful acts. Torts
can shift the burden of loss from the injured party to the party who is at
fault or better suited to bear the burden of the loss. Typically, a party
seeking redress through tort law will ask for damages in the form of
monetary compensation. Less common remedies include injunction and
restitution.

The boundaries of tort law are defined by common law and state statutory
law. Judges, in interpreting the language of statutes, have wide latitude in
determining which actions qualify as legally cognizable
wrongs, which defenses may override any given claim, and the
appropriate measure of damages. Although tort law varies by state, many
courts utilize the Restatement of Torts (2nd) as an influential guide.

Torts fall into three general categories: intentional torts (e.g., intentionally
hitting a person); negligent torts (e.g., causing an accident by failing to
obey traffic rules); and strict liability torts (e.g., liability for making and
selling defective products). Intentional torts are wrongs that the defendant
knew or should have known would result through his or her actions or
omissions. Negligent torts occur when the defendant's actions were
unreasonably unsafe. Unlike intentional and negligent torts, strict liability
torts do not depend on the degree of care that the defendant used. Rather,
in strict liability cases, courts focus on whether a particular result or harm
manifested. In tort, there are two broad categories of activities for which a
plaintiff may be held strictly liable - possession of certain animals and
5
abnormally dangerous activities. Additionally, in the area of torts known
as products liability, there is a sub-category known as strict products
liability which applies when a defective product for which an appropriate
defendant holds responsibility causes injury to an appropriate plaintiff.

There are numerous specific torts including trespass, assault, battery,

negligence, products liability and intentional infliction of emotional
distress. There are also separate areas of tort law including nuisance,
defamation, invasion of privacy, and a category of economic torts.

Remedies

The law recognizes torts as civil wrongs and allows injured parties to
recover for their losses. Injured parties may bring suit to recover
damages in the form of monetary compensation or for an injunction,
which compels a party to cease an activity. In certain cases, courts will
award punitive damages in addition to compensatory damages to deter
further misconduct.

In the vast majority of tort cases, the court will award compensatory
damages to an injured party that has successfully proven his or her case.
Compensatory damages are typically equal to the monetary value of the
injured party's loss of earnings, loss of future earning capacity, pain and
suffering, and reasonable medical expenses. Thus, courts may
award damages for incurred as well as expected losses.

When the court has an interest in deterring future misconduct, the court
may award punitive damages in addition to compensatory damages. For
example, in a case against a manufacturer for a defectively manufactured
product, a court may award punitive damages to compel the manufacturer
to ensure more careful production going forward.

In some cases, injured parties may bring suit to obtain an injunction rather
than monetary relief. Courts grant injunctions infrequently, and the party
seeking an injunction must prove that it would suffer considerable or
irreparable harm without the court's intervention.

6
TEXTO 2A: Tort Law vs. Criminal Law (gráficos y texto)

Tort Law vs. Criminal Law (Gráficos y texto)

7
TEXTO 2B: Tort law vs Criminal Law

Fuente: http://www.buzzle.com/articles/understanding-the-difference-between-tort-
and-criminal-law.html

Tort Law Vs. Criminal Law

Crimes and torts are wrongdoings. While torts give rise to civil liability,
crimes give rise to criminal liability. There are certain torts that may be
give rise to both civil and criminal liability. Tort law deals with torts and
criminal law deals with crimes. Let us take a look at the difference between
tort and criminal laws.

Purpose
◾ Both criminal law and tort law are used for taking corrective action
against wrongdoers. As torts are wrongdoings against individuals, tort
law is aimed at providing redress to aggrieved parties and deterring
people from committing torts. The main purpose is to compensate the
victim for the harm he/she suffered
◾ Crimes are considered as wrongdoings against the state or society as a
whole. Certain acts are classified by the state as crimes, and such acts are
forbidden by law; as they threaten public safety and welfare. Though a
crime may have created an immediate victim(s), the state is considered as
the ultimate victim; because a criminal (like a robber) can be dangerous for
any person in society if he is let loose. So, the main purpose of criminal law
is to protect society from crimes.
Action Against the Wrongdoer
◾ In case of torts, the aggrieved party or the victim can sue the wrongdoer
in a civil court, seeking damages for the harm suffered by the former. The
person who initiates such an action is called the plaintiff, and the person
who is sued is called the defendant.
◾ According to criminal law, the state is responsible for charging a person
with a crime. The state is represented in the court by the prosecutor, who
conducts the case. So, the action against the wrongdoer is initiated by the
victim in case of a tort, whereas the state initiates such action in a crime.

Court Proceedings
◾ Unlike criminal law, tort laws are mainly based on common law and
precedents. The wrongdoer is 'sued' for a tort. Though the Seventh
Amendment offers the right to jury trial for defendants in civil cases, it is
8
not commonly awarded in case of torts. In case of standard of proof in
torts, evidence has a greater weight. The golden rule is 'preponderance of
the evidence', which means the plaintiff must have convincing evidence to
prove the case. Most of the constitutional clauses that offer protection to
the defendants in criminal cases are not available in torts.
◾ As mentioned above, the state has classified certain acts as crimes. So,
criminal laws are mostly based on statutes made by the legislature. The
defendant is 'tried or prosecuted' for committing a crime. According to the
Sixth Amendment of the United States Constitution, the defendants have
the right to jury trial in criminal cases. When it comes to the standard of
proof, crimes have to be proved 'beyond a reasonable doubt'. Crimes
require a higher level of proof, and the prosecutor must prove the crime
beyond a reasonable doubt. There are various constitutional clauses that
offer protection and support to defendants in criminal cases. They include
double jeopardy, ex post facto law, right to speedy trial, right to counsel,
etc.

Court Verdict
◾ In tort law, the wrongdoer is liable or not liable to pay damages for the
tort committed. The defendant has to pay compensation, as decided by the
court, on the basis of harm suffered by the plaintiff. The right to appeal is
available for both the defendant and plaintiff.
◾ According to criminal law, the wrongdoer can be guilty or not guilty of
the crime. The defendant can be sentenced to fine, imprisonment, or both.
Rarely, death sentence may also be awarded. Though there is no provision
for damages in criminal law, the victims are compensated in rare cases. In
criminal law, only the defendant has the right to appeal.
This is only a brief overview about the basic differences between tort law
and criminal law. There are certain wrongdoings that amount to crimes as
well as torts. In such cases, the victim can initiate a civil case against the
defendant for damages. For example, the victim of assault may file a civil
suit seeking compensation for the damages suffered. In short, it can be said
that the ultimate aim of both laws is protection of citizens.

9
Fuente: www.slideshare.net/fatimad1/lecture-10-law-of-tort

10
TEXTO 3: Interpretación de gráficos y cuadros

Interpretación de gráficos y cuadros

11
12
TEXTO 4: Cartoon: Humor

Cartoon: Humor

1 ¿Cuáles son las palabras clave en este caso? ¿Cuántas acepciones tienen
los términos battery y assault? ¿En cuál de ellos el efecto se logra a través
de la pronunciación?

2 ¿Qué sucedería si se utilizaran los equivalentes en español?

13
TEXTO 5: Hyundai Ordered To Pay $73M In Punitive Damages
In 2011 Crash Case, Liability Lowered By A Third

Fuente: www.ibtimes.com

Hyundai Ordered To Pay $73M In Punitive Damages In

2011 Crash Case, Liability Lowered By A Third
A Montana judge ruled last week that Hyundai Motor will have to pay $73
million in punitive damages in a lawsuit filed against the company over a
fatal car accident that killed two Missoula teenagers in July 2011. The latest
ruling reduces Hyundai's liability from a previous award of $240 million,
but rejected the automaker's bid to further reduce it to $1 million.

The families of 19-year-old Trevor Olson and 14-year-old Tanner Olson

sued Hyundai in 2011, claiming that a broken steering knuckle in the
Hyundai vehicle, which Trevor was driving, caused the crash. The Seoul-
based automobile giant had argued that the accident was caused by
fireworks exploding inside the car before the crash. Jurors had ordered
Hyundai at the time to pay $240 million in punitive damages.

Lake County District Judge Deborah Kim Christopher found in a ruling

filed last week that Montana’s laws that limit punitive damages are
unconstitutional, the Associated Press, or AP, reported, but also noted in
her ruling that “...the Court also concludes in light of the degree of the
Defendant's reprehensibility, only the highest single-digit multiplier
would be appropriate,” adding that punitive damage awards must be
reasonable.

Christopher upheld the state court jury’s award of $8.1 million in actual
damages to the families of the victims and, by multiplying it by nine -- the
highest single-digit number, ordered Hyundai to pay nearly $73 million in
punitive damages.

“The defendants had over a decade of notice of problems or defects with

their steering knuckles in their passenger vehicles -- which problems or
defects were contrary to their own material specifications -- and
apparently took no steps whatsoever to investigate,” Christopher wrote in
a Sept. 19 court order.

Meanwhile, Jim Trainor, a company spokesperson, told Bloomberg that

Hyundai will appeal against the ruling.
14
“Hyundai believes the rulings are erroneous and constitute an extreme
outlier in the law on punitive damages,” Trainor told Bloomberg in an
email. “Nationally, both state and federal courts have consistently upheld
the constitutionality of punitive damages caps.”

Información para una mejor comprensión del texto: Texto completo en

material adicional

What Does "Punitive Damages" Mean?

www.legalmatch.com

Punitive damages have the two-fold purpose of punishing defendants for

their actions and deterring them from committing the acts again in the
future. These types of damages are very different from compensatory
damages which are meant to reimburse the plaintiff for their economic loss
or physical injury. For example, in a personal injury suit, compensatory
damages would cover items such as the victim’s medical bills and hospital
expenses, as well as any damage to property. The court would then
determine whether it would be appropriate to award the victim with
punitive damages in addition to or “on top of” compensatory damages.

15
 UNIDAD 10:

Derecho de daños

MATERIAL ADICIONAL

16
Apéndice 1: Torts: motor vehicle defect cases

Fuente:www.findlaw.com

TORTS: Motor Vehicle Defect Cases

Motor vehicle defect cases include claims involving not only passenger
automobiles, but also motorcycles, trucks, and vans. Claims may be based
on defects in the body and frame, brakes and braking system, cooling and
temperature control system, electrical system, engine assembly, exhaust
system, fuel system, lubrication system, passenger compartment, steering
and suspension systems, transmission and drivetrain, and other parts and
accessories.
Unlike an ordinary personal injury claim for negligence after a motor
vehicle accident, in order to establish a vehicle manufacturer or seller's
liability for a car defect, you do not need to show that they were careless.
Instead, liability in motor vehicle defect cases is controlled by the doctrine
of strict liability. Regardless of what steps a manufacturer or dealer says it
takes in designing, assembling, or handling a motor vehicle, you can make
a strict liability claim based on a motor vehicle defect -- without making
any showing as to carelessness -- if all three of the following conditions
exist:
 The vehicle or one of its components had an "unreasonably
dangerous" defect that injured you. The defect can come into
existence either in the design of the vehicle, during manufacture,
during handling or shipment (i.e. delivery from the manufacturer),
or through a failure to warn consumers of a dangerous aspect of the
vehicle.
 The defect caused an injury while the vehicle was being used in a
way that it was intended to be used. For example, you may not be
able to recover if a sports sedan were used to cross a stream.
 The vehicle had not been substantially changed from the condition in
which it was originally sold. "Substantially" means in a way that
affects how the vehicle performs.
(. . .)
Punitive Damages
A recent trend in vehicle product liability cases is to increase awards of
punitive damages for those who successfully bring a claim against a
manufacturer or seller. These punitive damages awards are above and
17
beyond damages to compensate a plaintiff for his or her injuries, and can
range into the tens of millions of dollars in certain instances. Punitive
damages are intended to punish vehicle manufacturers and encourage
them to fix inherent defects in vehicle designs that have resulted in injury.
Traditionally, vehicle manufacturers have engaged in what is known as a
"cost-benefit" analysis when deciding whether to change a potentially
defective vehicle design. In this process, the manufacturer will calculate
the cost of implementing a design change (i.e. through vehicle recalls and
repairs), and weigh that cost against the potential cost of litigation and
settlement after the defect causes injuries. Punitive damages are often
awarded in order to add to the potential costs a manufacturer will face if it
decides not to fix a design defect, thus shifting the cost-benefit analysis
toward the elimination of defects.
Product liability actions are often quite complex, and establishing legal
fault often requires the assistance and testimony of experts. There are
several theories under which a plaintiff might bring a claim, and several
defenses that might defeat such a claim. Additionally, every state has its
own laws and specific statutes that will affect a product liability action.
Car Defects: The Concept of "Crashworthiness"
The most important concept in vehicle defect cases is "crashworthiness" --
the ability of a vehicle to prevent injuries to the occupants in the event of a
collision. During a collision, a vehicle's occupants are subject to a number
of forces that can result in injury, including rapid deceleration and rapid
acceleration, depending on the direction of impact in the collision.
Crashworthiness deals primarily with the "second collision" that results
from these forces, in which the driver and passengers collide against the
interior of the vehicle. An effective crashworthy vehicle design will
distribute these injurious forces over as great a period of time and distance
as possible, including by directing them to parts of the body that are more
capable of withstanding them.
Crashworthiness features, which are designed to minimize occupant
injuries, prevent ejection from the vehicle, and reduce the risk of fire,
include: seat belts; crumple zones; and, airbags (including side impact
protection).
Liability Based On "Crashworthiness"
It is key to remember that the cause of the accident is usually considered
irrelevant in crashworthiness cases, but that the concept can be used to
hold a vehicle manufacturer liable for injuries sustained in a car accident
because of a defect that was not the cause of the accident, but caused or

18
made worse the injuries suffered in the accident. Basically,
crashworthiness is concerned with whether the manufacturer designed the
vehicle and its components so that it is safe for any reasonably foreseeable
use. A vehicle's reasonably foreseeable use includes the possibility of its
involvement in a collision; therefore, a manufacturer's duty extends to the
design of a vehicle that is reasonably safe should a collision occur. Injuries
caused by a vehicle's crashworthiness are considered (and can be
compensated) apart from the injuries that were caused by the accident
itself. This distinction can prove to be a little difficult when it comes time
to prove your injuries and their causes, especially when it comes to
medical proof of the extent of an enhanced injury beyond the injury that
could have been expected if the vehicle had been crashworthy.
Recently, there has been significant effort in Congress and in some state
legislatures, to establish that a vehicle manufacturer's compliance with
government safety standards is a valid defense to a vehicle defect claim,
but courts are continuing to rule that, regardless of federal standards,
vehicle manufacturers have a duty to build a car that is as safe as is
reasonably possible under the present state of mechanical technology,
vehicle design, and safety.
Pursuing Your Claim Based On "Crashworthiness"
In order for you to recover in a claim based on a motor vehicle's
crashworthiness, you will likely need to show that a design feature that
was reasonably avoidable either caused an injury in an automobile
accident, or increased the risk of that injury. One of the most effective
ways to establish this is to show that a safety device was available, and
that such a device could have and should have been used. An experienced
attorney will consider all legal options in your case, and will enlist the help
of expert vehicle design and safety consultants in order to ensure that your
right to compensation for your injuries is fully protected.

19
Apéndice 2: What does “punitive damages” mean?
Fuente: www.legalmatch.com

What Does "Punitive Damages" Mean?

If you believe you have a personal injury claim, you might also be asking the question
“what are punitive damages?” Punitive damages have the two-fold purpose of
punishing defendants for their actions and deterring them from committing the acts
again in the future. These types of damages are very different from compensatory
damages, which are meant to reimburse the plaintiff for their economic loss or physical
injury.

For example, in a personal injury suit, compensatory damages would cover items such
as the victim’s medical bills and hospital expenses, as well as any damage to property.
The court would then determine whether it would be appropriate to award the victim
with punitive damages in addition to or “on top of” compensatory damages.

When Are Punitive Damages Awarded?

Punitive damages are not awarded in every case, and a court must submit a punitive
damages claim to a very rigorous and thorough analysis. They are typically available in
civil matters such as tort and personal injuries claims where the defendant’s conduct is
particularly reprehensible. Punitive damages are usually not awarded for breaches of
contracts, although they may be issued in some situations such as for independent torts
committed in a contract setting.

The court will look for the following elements to be satisfied before awarding punitive
damages:

 The plaintiff must first be awarded another type of actual damages, such as
compensatory, nominal, or restitutionary damages. Punitive damages are never
awarded alone by themselves.
 The defendant in the case must have acted in a way that is more than merely
negligent or accidental; for example they must have acted maliciously or
purposefully.
 The punitive damages must be awarded in an amount that is “relatively
proportionate” to the actual damages. Punitive damages for excessive amounts
are considered unconstitutional.
 They are usually available only for acts that directly harm the plaintiff

Punitive damages will only be awarded if the above factors are all entirely satisfied.
The most challenging area for courts issuing punitive damages has to do with
determining what a “relatively proportionate” amount is.

20
How Are Punitive Damages Calculated?

Generally speaking, there is no maximum dollar cap for issuing punitive damages.
However, this does not mean that plaintiffs are entitled to claim as much as they want
for punitive damages. Several Supreme Court cases have provided guidelines as to
how punitive damages should be calculated in relation to compensatory damages.
Calculations also vary from state to state.

What Is the Limit to the Amount That a Plaintiff Can Recover?

Generally, punitive damages should not exceed a total that is four times the amount of
compensatory damages. So, for example if the plaintiff was allowed to recover $100,000
in compensatory damages, most courts would place the limit at 4 times that amount, or
$400,000. This may vary from state to state, but a ratio of 4:1 is usually considered
reasonable and “relatively proportionate.” Courts have stated that significantly larger
ratios such as 10:1 are unconstitutional and disproportionate.

Are There Any Other Factors Courts Use to Determine Punitive Damages?

Yes, courts will also consider other factors to determine punitive damages. These may
include:

 How reprehensible the defendant’s conduct is - particularly egregious or

malicious actions would justify a higher punitive damages award.
 The difference between the harm actually suffered by the plaintiff and the
amount of punitive damages being requested.
 Amounts of punitive damages awarded in similar cases.

Particularly high amounts of punitive damages may be justified under some

circumstances, such as:

 Those involving non-economic harm that is difficult to calculate

 Injuries that are difficult to detect
 Conduct that is considered extraordinarily offensive.

In all instances, especially those involving large amounts of punitive damages, the
defendant is entitled to fair notice as to both the amount of punitive damages being
awarded and the conduct they committed which justified the high award.

21