Definition
A civil remedy is the legal relief available to a private individual whose rights have been injured, pursued through civil court proceedings rather than through criminal prosecution. Where a wrong gives rise to both a civil and a criminal action, the civil remedy belongs to the injured party and serves to redress that party's personal loss or harm. The criminal prosecution, by contrast, belongs to the state and addresses the wrong done to the public order.
Civil remedies include damages (compensatory, nominal, or punitive), injunctive relief, restitution, rescission, specific performance, and declaratory judgment, among others. The specific remedy available depends on the nature of the underlying claim — contract, tort, statutory violation, or equitable wrong — and on what the law of the jurisdiction makes available for that claim.
---
Common Language
Modern common usage (Wiktionary): "Remedy" in ordinary usage means a cure, solution, or fix for a problem — most naturally used in medicinal or practical contexts.
Historical common usage (Webster's 1913): "That which corrects or counteracts an evil of any kind; a cure; redress; relief." Webster's also recognized a legal sense: "the legal means to recover a right, or to obtain redress for a wrong."
The gap between common and legal meaning is real but narrow. In ordinary English, "remedy" implies any corrective action. In law, "civil remedy" is a term of art specifying not just that relief is available, but the procedural channel through which it is obtained — a civil action by a private party — as opposed to a criminal prosecution by the state. The word "civil" is doing the heavy lifting.
---
Common Confusion
Civil remedy is sometimes conflated with the underlying cause of action or with the right itself. The right is what the law protects; the cause of action is the legal theory under which a party can sue; the remedy is the relief a court can grant if that party prevails. These three concepts are related but distinct, and historical sources sometimes blur them.
Civil remedy is also occasionally confused with civil liability. Liability is the legal obligation to answer for a wrong; the remedy is what the law provides to enforce that obligation or compensate for its breach.
A related source of confusion is the distinction between legal remedies (historically available at common law, most commonly damages) and equitable remedies (historically available only in courts of equity, such as injunctions and specific performance). In most modern jurisdictions, law and equity have merged procedurally, but the distinction retains substantive significance in many areas — including availability, as of right versus discretion, and the right to a jury trial.
---
Why It Matters in Research
The phrase "civil remedy" is a signpost term in legal research. Its primary function in historical sources is not to define what relief looks like, but to mark the boundary between private and public enforcement of law. When you encounter the phrase in older materials, you are most often reading a comparative statement — civil remedy versus criminal prosecution — rather than a substantive description of what the remedy is.
Several navigational points matter for corpus researchers:
First, the suspension doctrine. Bouvier's entry trails off mid-sentence but was heading toward an important common law rule: in cases of felony, a private party's civil remedy was historically suspended until after criminal prosecution concluded. Courts reasoned that permitting civil suits to proceed first might interfere with, or effectively pardon, the criminal proceeding. This doctrine, once significant in England, largely fell away in American practice. Researchers working in nineteenth-century materials should flag any discussion of this suspension rule, as it affects the availability of civil remedies in historical tort cases arising from serious crimes.
Second, the phrase "civil remedy" appears with high frequency in statutory contexts, where legislatures create new private rights of action alongside regulatory or criminal enforcement schemes. A statute may impose criminal penalties for certain conduct and also expressly provide — or expressly preserve — a civil remedy for injured private parties. Federal civil rights statutes, consumer protection laws, and environmental statutes regularly use this structure. When researching statutory claims, confirming whether a civil remedy is expressly provided, implied, or explicitly foreclosed is a threshold question.
Third, the election of remedies doctrine intersects directly with this term. Where multiple civil remedies exist for the same wrong — say, both damages and rescission in a contract fraud case — a party may be required to elect between them, or may lose one by pursuing the other. This doctrine is covered in the encyclopedia entry on remedies overview and election, and researchers should consult it when tracing the scope of available relief.
Fourth, jurisdictional source matters. Civil remedies available under federal law may differ substantially from those available under state law for the same underlying conduct, and vice versa. Statutory civil remedies are especially variable.
---
Historical Dictionary Support
All three historical sources converge on the same core definition: a civil remedy is the relief available to a private party by civil action, as distinguished from criminal prosecution. This is a durable definition that has not changed in substance from the nineteenth century to the present.
Black's frames the concept most cleanly, connecting it to the injury of "private and individual rights" by a "delict or crime" — the latter word signaling that the same act can give rise to both proceedings. Bouvier adds procedural texture, distinguishing the civil action from the indictment and introducing the suspension doctrine for felonies and treason, which Black's omits. Rapalje & Lawrence is the most compressed, essentially restating the public/private distinction in a single sentence.
What the historical sources do not do is describe the content of civil remedies in any detail. None of the three distinguishes between damages, injunctions, restitution, or other forms of relief. For that substance, researchers must turn to entries on specific remedy types. The historical dictionary treatment of "civil remedy" is definitional and boundary-marking, not descriptive of the relief itself.
One notable gap: none of the three historical sources addresses statutory civil remedies — the legislatively created private right of action that became a dominant feature of American law in the twentieth century. Their framing assumes tort and common law as the natural source of civil claims. Modern research must account for the statutory layer.
---
Jurisdictional Note
The availability, measure, and limits of specific civil remedies vary significantly by jurisdiction and by the type of claim. Punitive damages, for example, are unavailable in contract claims in most U.S. jurisdictions but available in tort under appropriate circumstances; some states cap their amount by statute. Equitable remedies remain discretionary and are subject to doctrines such as laches and unclean hands that have no counterpart in damages claims. Researchers should verify remedy availability under the governing substantive law, not assume a uniform national standard.
---
Encyclopedia Cross-Reference
Remedies — Overview and Election of Remedies (The Law Mind Contracts & Commercial Law Encyclopedia)
Remedies — Rescission and Restitution as Equitable Remedies (The Law Mind Contracts & Commercial Law Encyclopedia)
Fraud Penalty Civil (The Law Mind Tax Encyclopedia)
---