Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
Articles 1 - 2 of 2
Full-Text Articles in Entire DC Network
Liability For Unintentional Nuisances: How The Restatement Of Torts Almost Negligently Killed The Right To Exclude In Property Law, Jill M. Fraley
Liability For Unintentional Nuisances: How The Restatement Of Torts Almost Negligently Killed The Right To Exclude In Property Law, Jill M. Fraley
Scholarly Articles
This article argues that nuisance was historically unique in tort law because of its special role in protecting property rights.' In other words, nuisance historically had distinct features addressed to the special situation of land. Most importantly, nuisance protected the right to exclude in a way that no other cause of action did. The Second Restatement's change then diminished our rights to private property to the extent that it has been adopted. The majority of courts retain the more logical and defensible position--that property rights are special and nuisance encompasses something more than the idea of negligence.
Understanding The Absence Of A Duty To Reasonably Rescue In American Tort Law, Marin Roger Scordato
Understanding The Absence Of A Duty To Reasonably Rescue In American Tort Law, Marin Roger Scordato
Scholarly Articles
The absence in American tort law of a duty to reasonably aid a stranger in peril is perplexing. It is an odd gap in the otherwise nearly pervasive presence of a duty of reasonable care in the modern law of negligence. It utterly fails to accurately articulate our conventional sense of morality and appropriate social behavior. It stands in stark contrast to the treatment of this issue throughout the rest of the world. It is a rule of tort law for which very few commentators have had a kind word.
This Article sets forth a spirited defense of the traditional …