“In regard to business law, tort has been defined as the advancement of a wrongful or grieving act which results in the infringement on individual’s right and in most case it leads to civil liability against the offender” (Rhode 989). On the other hand, “Tort reform allows different states to enact laws that are expected to limit or reduce the number of damages that an infringed part can receive in case a legal civil liability case is perused in a court of law” (Croley and Hanson 1786). Frequently, a person is certain to seek for compensation in case the other party inferentially took no reasonable efforts to prevent any harm against him or her and thus the need to seek for a recompense as result of the damages caused under different jurisprudence. …show more content…
“Consumers or any person who feel grieved by the counterpart activities is lawfully entitled to sue for damages in a court of law across various states” (Abraham 850). However, there has been a serious concern whereby once an individual file for compensation against the third party, speculations arise on the benchmark that he or she is simply greedy for cash and situation which ought to be retrogressive in nature. Basically, currently, tort reforms obligate each state in the US to develop laws that are meant to cap or limit the amount of damaged that a plaintiff can demand from the offender. The laws are enacted in line with personal injury claims which can run into millions of