【正文】 你可以有異議地繳納稅款并去告主管的上級官員或市（政府）要求退還多繳的金額，但那位稅收官是可以高枕無憂的。對于按上級明文下達的命令甚或心照不宣 的命令行事的許多不同種類的官員，亦適用同上的總規(guī)則。此外，某些州已經(jīng)通過法律使父母對其未成年子女所造成的故意損害負責。如果街道里弄的小霸王有到處去打年齡比他小的兒童、向狗或貓兒擲石塊等習慣而且如果他的父母對他習以為常的惡習又是知情的，那么法院會認定他們有義務約束并監(jiān)督他。但是如果你十歲的孩子不小心把棒球一擊，擊穿了商店的櫥窗，那么盡管店主怒氣沖沖地一再抗議，在法律上你仍不必對配 一塊櫥窗的費用負責。其中包括夫婦（各不對他方的侵權行為負責）和父母（一般不對子女之侵權行為負責）。 主權豁免原則（即一個國家非經(jīng)該國家同意不得被列為被告）嚴重地限制了你因政府和政府機關所雇工作人員之侵權行為而對該政府和政府機關提起訴訟的權利。 幾乎所有的雇用人都要對其被雇傭人的侵權行為負責，但以后者的侵權行為是在雇傭中所犯者 為限。 一般來說，任何人（不問年齡大小、智力健全與否）都必須對其侵權行為負責，即因其行為之后果對其受害人負責。街道上有一個行兇搶劫的路賊毆打了你，使你出于自衛(wèi)，匆匆舉起傘來，結果碰傷了行人；這樣，該行為人既要對你（因為驚動了你的精神系統(tǒng)）也要對行人（因為行人得花錢請大夫把腦勺子縫好）。 同樣，如果鄰居院子里有一棵看來是勁健有力的榆樹在風暴中倒在你的屋頂上，你大半是不能向你鄰居要求損害賠償?shù)?，因為榆樹之倒下既非處于他的故意，又非他的過失所造成的 已被證明是侵權行為者，要對業(yè)經(jīng)證明系因其行為所造成的損害承擔責任。 為了因他人的侵權行為而請求損害賠償，你必須證明該行為或系出于故意（如向他人分發(fā)通函，說你是賊）或由過失（如在停車場內(nèi)負有小心駕車之責的司機不慎碰撞了你的汽車）所致。但那是兩件互相獨立的訴訟。 如果同一個行為既屬侵權又是犯罪，那么違法行為就面臨兩種獨立的起訴：以你為原告的訴訟和以國家為原 告的訴訟。日期，不管你勝訴還是敗訴，你聘請的律師辦案的費用就由你自己支付了。一般他是不會坐牢的。如果你肯定某人雖已侵犯了你的個人權利卻尚無侵犯社會作為一個整體的利益，那么是否要上民事法院去告他以謀求救助，這就全得由你自己來決定了。只要有人犯罪，國家就有責任偵查，在刑事法院追訴并負擔對被告依法起訴的費用。但是除非實際損壞了他人汽車或傷害了他人身體，他還沒有侵犯任何人的權利。一位不慎在停車場內(nèi)碰了你的東西且撞歪了你車上保險杠的汽車司機已經(jīng)侵犯了你的財產(chǎn)權，但是他沒有犯什么罪。人們可能成為侵權行為被害人的機會要比可能成為犯罪行被害人的機會多得多，而人們可能侵權的機會也要比可能犯罪的機會多得多。 Leading legal writers agree that no one has satisfactorily defined a tort. this is partly because torts are so mon, so widespread and so varied. You are far more likely to be the victim of a tort than of a crime, and you are also far more likely to mit a tort than a crime. A tort is a civil wrong against an individual. A crime , on the other hand, is an offense against the public at large, or the state. An automobile driver who carelessly bumps into your car in a parking lot and crumples 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 wa