Heartbalm tort

Last updated
A schematic depiction of the tort of criminal conversation from 1807. Crim. con.jpg
A schematic depiction of the tort of criminal conversation from 1807.

In the common law tradition, a heartbalm tort or heartbalm action is a civil action that a person may bring to seek monetary compensation for the end or disruption of a romantic or marital relationship. A heartbalm statute is a statute forbidding such actions. [1]

Contents

Heartbalm actions in the United States typically include seduction, criminal conversation, alienation of affection, and breach of promise to marry. [1] Of these, criminal conversation and alienation of affection are marital torts, originally restricted to husbands but in many states later made available to spouses regardless of gender. [2] Seduction and breach of promise are nonmarital torts. [2]

In England and other common law jurisdictions, additional heartbalm actions were traditionally recognized, such as enticement and wrongful harbouring (tortious refusal to allow a husband to visit a wife who has left him). [3] A claim for damages based on loss of consortium is also sometimes considered a heartbalm action in England and elsewhere. [4]

In the United States, heartbalm actions were widespread until high-profile stories in the early 20th century about heartbalm claims being abused for blackmail and extortion led to calls for repeal. [5] The first state to abolish all heartbalm actions was Indiana, with “An Act to promote public morals” in 1935. [6] By 1952, 16 more states had followed its example. [6] Many states that abolished other heartbalm torts retained the tort of seduction, however; of the ten states that had abolished heartbalm actions by 1938, four allowed minors to sue for seduction and three more kept the tort of seduction intact. [7]

Following a report by the Law Reform Committee in 1963, England abolished all of the remaining traditional heartbalm torts (excluding loss of consortium) by statute in 1970. [4]

In the United States, as of 2016, seven states still allow heartbalm actions: Hawaii, Mississippi, Missouri, New Mexico, North Carolina, South Dakota, and Utah. [8] However, such actions are uncommon even where they are still allowed. [8]

Works cited

See also

Related Research Articles

At common law, damages are a remedy in the form of a monetary award to be paid to a claimant as compensation for loss or injury. To warrant the award, the claimant must show that a breach of duty has caused foreseeable loss. To be recognised at law, the loss must involve damage to property, or mental or physical injury; pure economic loss is rarely recognised for the award of damages.

A tort is a civil wrong that causes a claimant to suffer loss or harm, resulting in legal liability for the person who commits the tortious act. Tort law can be contrasted with criminal law, which deals with criminal wrongs that are punishable by the state. While criminal law aims to punish individuals who commit crimes, tort law aims to compensate individuals who suffer harm as a result of the actions of others. Some wrongful acts, such as assault and battery, can result in both a civil lawsuit and a criminal prosecution in countries where the civil and criminal legal systems are separate. Tort law may also be contrasted with contract law, which provides civil remedies after breach of a duty that arises from a contract. Obligations in both tort and criminal law are more fundamental and are imposed regardless of whether the parties have a contract.

Punitive damages, or exemplary damages, are damages assessed in order to punish the defendant for outrageous conduct and/or to reform or deter the defendant and others from engaging in conduct similar to that which formed the basis of the lawsuit. Although the purpose of punitive damages is not to compensate the plaintiff, the plaintiff will receive all or some of the punitive damages in award.

Champerty and maintenance are doctrines in common law jurisdictions that aim to preclude frivolous litigation:

Wrongful deathclaim is a claim against a person who can be held liable for a death. The claim is brought in a civil action, usually by close relatives, as enumerated by statute. In wrongful death cases, survivors are compensated for the harm and losses they have suffered after losing a loved one.

This article addresses torts in United States law. As such, it covers primarily common law. Moreover, it provides general rules, as individual states all have separate civil codes. There are three general categories of torts: intentional torts, negligence, and strict liability torts.

The system of tort law in Australia is broadly similar to that in other common law countries. However, some divergences in approach have occurred as its independent legal system has developed.

Breach of promise is a common-law tort, abolished in many jurisdictions. It was also called breach of contract to marry, and the remedy awarded was known as heart balm.

Loss of consortium is a term used in the law of torts that refers to the deprivation of the benefits of a family relationship due to injuries caused by a tortfeasor. In this context, the word consortium means "(the right of) association and fellowship between two married people". Damages may be claimed under three theories: incurred medical costs or those yet to be incurred by the plaintiff, the loss of an injured spouse's services, and loss of society.

An intentional tort is a category of torts that describes a civil wrong resulting from an intentional act on the part of the tortfeasor. The term negligence, on the other hand, pertains to a tort that simply results from the failure of the tortfeasor to take sufficient care in fulfilling a duty owed, while strict liability torts refers to situations where a party is liable for injuries no matter what precautions were taken.

A restraint on alienation, in the law of real property, is a clause used in the conveyance of real property that seeks to prohibit the recipient from selling or otherwise transferring their interest in the property. Under the common law such restraints are void as against the public policy of allowing landowners to freely dispose of their property. Perhaps the ultimate restraint on alienation was the fee tail, a form of ownership which required that property be passed down in the same family from generation to generation, which has also been widely abolished.

Alienation of affections is a common law tort, abolished in many jurisdictions. Where it still exists, an action is brought by a spouse against a third party alleged to be responsible for damaging the marriage, most often resulting in divorce. The defendant in an alienation of affections suit is typically an adulterous spouse's lover, although family members, counselors, and therapists or clergy members who have advised a spouse to seek divorce have also been sued for alienation of affections.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Personal injury</span> Legal term for an injury to a person

Personal injury is a legal term for an injury to the body, mind, or emotions, as opposed to an injury to property. In common law jurisdictions the term is most commonly used to refer to a type of tort lawsuit in which the person bringing the suit has suffered harm to their body or mind. Personal injury lawsuits are filed against the person or entity that caused the harm through negligence, gross negligence, reckless conduct, or intentional misconduct, and in some cases on the basis of strict liability. Different jurisdictions describe the damages in different ways, but damages typically include the injured person's medical bills, pain and suffering, and diminished quality of life.

Insurance bad faith is a tort unique to the law of the United States that an insurance company commits by violating the "implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing" which automatically exists by operation of law in every insurance contract.

The obsolete German legal concept Kranzgeld is heart balm rewarded as compensation to a woman of "immaculate reputation" if a man broke off his engagement after having had sexual intercourse with her. Immaculate reputation in this context meant mainly virginity, but could also be lost through other factors such as being convicted of a crime.

The following outline is provided as an overview of and introduction to tort law in common law jurisdictions:

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Criminal conversation</span> Tort arising from adultery

At common law, criminal conversation, often abbreviated as crim. con., is a tort arising from adultery. "Conversation" is an old euphemism for sexual intercourse that is obsolete except as part of this term.

In the North American legal system and in US Occupational Safety and Health Administration regulations, willful violation or willful non-compliance is a violation of workplace rules and policies that occurs either deliberately or as a result of neglect.

The tort of seduction was a civil wrong or tort in common law legal systems, and still exists in some jurisdictions.

The history of adultery in English law is a complex topic, including changing understandings of what sexual acts constituted adultery, unequal treatment of men and women under the law, and competing jurisdictions of secular and ecclesiastical authorities. Prosecution for adultery as such ceased to be possible in English law in 1970.

References

  1. 1 2 "heartbalm statute". Black's Law Dictionary (8th ed.). p. 740. The teminology in this field is somewhat confusing, since a heartbalm statute abolishes lawsuits that were known as heartbalm suits[.]
  2. 1 2 Sinclair, M. B. W. (1987). "Seduction and the Myth of the Ideal Woman" (PDF). Law and Inequality: 34.
  3. ↑ Report on Family Law, pp. 86–87.
  4. 1 2 Brode 2002, p. 187.
  5. ↑ Tori Telfer (2018-02-13). "How the "Heart Balm Racket" Convinced America That Women Were Up to No Good". Smithsonian Magazine. Retrieved 2020-01-31.
  6. 1 2 "Avoidance of the Incidence of the Anti-Heartbalm Statutes". Columbia Law Review. 52 (2): 242–257. February 1952. doi:10.2307/1119133. JSTOR   1119133.
  7. ↑ Brode 2002, p. 186.
  8. 1 2 "Illinois Repeals Heart Balm Acts for Alienation of Affection and More". 2016-04-12. Retrieved 2020-01-31. The number of lawsuits brought with these "heart balm" acts were minimal, and allowed limited damages.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.