Opinion and Intention in Tort Law

Where the conditions that are used to determine situations of misrepresentation and nondisclosure become somewhat murky lies in the role that is played by the somewhat abstract roles opinion and intention play in tort law and product representation.

Determining intent can play an important role when determining with issues of misrepresentation, because it remains integral to determining whether misrepresentation would have occurred. To put things very simply, intent, on both sides of representation issue, is the dictation of what on expected to receive from a transaction.

If the individual entered into a deal, forgetting a key piece of information that either would have proved vital to the injured party’s decision to undertake an agreement, or otherwise simply failed to realize its importance, he could be found less culpable in the situation because the individual entered the transaction with intentions of acting in good faith.

Opinion also plays a key role in all elements of tort law, because determination of neglect or responsibility, under the core standard of care on which tort law is based, is centered on finding a unity of opinion in the eyes of the law (or legal body, such as the court).

When applied to arguments over misrepresentation or nondisclosure, determinations over whether each occurred in a given situation, are again, formed by achieving a legal unity of opinion, which becomes more tenuous when the conflicts over whether something has been withheld or misrepresented is formed over a difference of opinion. For example, if one advertised a baseball product that said it would help someone hit a home run, but the complainant argues that because it failed to help him hit a home run, it does not work.

In both instances, intention and opinion can be very difficult to prove and establish under tort law, as their subjective nature can be difficult to quantify, causing situations where issues of plausible denial may prevent the formation of the unity of opinion that lies at the heart of nearly ever tort action.

NEXT: Proximate Cause