【正文】 les the fender had mitted no crime. Suppose, however, that after leaving the parking lot the same driver goes to a nearby bar, downs six whiskeys, then careens through a crowded city street at fifty miles an hour. Now he has mitted at least these crimes: drunken driving, reckless driving and endangering the lives of others. But unless he actually damages another car or injures someone he has not violated the rights of nay individual. A crime, then, is wrongful act against society. When a crime is mitted, it is the state’s responsibility to investigate, prosecute and bear the expense of legal acting against the defendant, in the court handling criminal matters. A tort, on the other hand, is an act that violates your private or personal rights. If you believe someone has violated your personal rights—— but has not acted against the interests of the public as a whole—— it is entirely up to you to seek relief by suing him in the civil courts. If the person who you believe has legally aggrieved you is found liable—— that is , if the judge or jury finds that he did in fact injure you or your property—— he may be required (a) to give you relief by paying you “ damages” for the injury or property loss you suffered, (b) to discontinue his wrongful acts or (c) to restore to you what he took from you. In rare cases he may be imprisoned. All moary damages awarded to you by the court in your suit are of course yours to keep. By the same token, the cost of hiring a lawyer to handle your case is your own personal expires whether you win or lose the case. Even a defendant who wins must bear his own legal costs. If the tort is also a crime, two separate legal actions confront the wrongdoer: yours and the state’s. we will discuss later the effect of these actions on each other. But they are independent of each other. A tort is usually mitted when someone injures you physically, damages or misuses your property, attacks your reputation without justification or takes away your liberty and freedom of action without just cause. To recover damages for a tort you must prove either that the act was mitted with deliberate intent (as when someone circulated a letter calling you a thief) or that it was the result of negligence (as in the case of the driver in the parking lot who carelessly hit your car when he had a duty to drive carefully). In most cases you must prove that the act inflicted actual damage or injuries. A malicious act that does you no harm, such as a threat to punch you in the nose or a shove in a crowded subway, is not a sufficient cause for legal action. Nor are you likely to recover damages from a neighbor when the healthylooking elm tree in his yard crashes down on your roof in a windstorm. The crash was not something he intended, nor was it the result of his negligence. A person who is proved to have mitted a tort have resulted from his act. A motorist who sideswipes your car, causing you to serve and hit a pedestrian, is responsible for damages both to you (for the injure to your car) and to the pedestrian (for his dental expenses in replacing the false teeth knocked ort when your car hit him). A mugger who attacks you on the street, leading you, in defending yourself, to raise your umbrella so quickly that you hit a passerby, is responsible both to you (for the shock to your nervous system) and to the passerby (for the cost of stitching up his scalp). He is also guilty of a crime and can be arrested and prosecuted. Generally speaking, any person, young or old, mentally petent or not, is responsible for his torts: for the consequences of his actions to others injured by those actions. The same person who in the eyes of the law is not mentally petent to mit a crime may noheless be held liable for mitting a tort. Alm