Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Publication Year
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 12 of 12
Full-Text Articles in Law
Immunity From Wrongful Death Liability: How Mickels Fails To Compensate, Kevin Buchanan
Immunity From Wrongful Death Liability: How Mickels Fails To Compensate, Kevin Buchanan
Missouri Law Review
Wrongful death statutes originated out of a need to compensate the family of a decedent “whose life was wrongfully taken.” Closely related to wrongful death statutes are survivorship statutes, which allow for the transmission of tort claims after the death of one or more of the parties. These statutes help address the once common maxim that it’s cheaper to kill a man than to maim him. Today, all fifty states have both wrongful death and survivorship statutes. In Mickels v. Danrad, the Supreme Court of Missouri declined to allow wrongful death claims where a defendant’s negligence accelerates the death of …
Bad Faith At Middle Age: Comments On The Principle Without A Name (Yet), Insurance Law, Contract Law, Specialness, Distinctiveness, And Difference, Robert H. Jerry Ii
Bad Faith At Middle Age: Comments On The Principle Without A Name (Yet), Insurance Law, Contract Law, Specialness, Distinctiveness, And Difference, Robert H. Jerry Ii
Faculty Publications
In this article, Robert Jerry expounds on Professor Abraham's article on insurer liability for bad faith by pointing out that the concept of institutional bad faith is not a new phenomenon, but rather, one that is as old as the insurance industry itself Jerry focuses on Abraham's depiction of the "specialness" and "distinctiveness" of insurance, while exploring additional instances of "rotten to the core" systemic bad faith dating as far back as the nineteenth-century. Much like Abraham did in his article on bad faith, Jerry uses these examples of systemic bad faith to further his assertion that the insurance industry, …
Dispensing Injustice: Stolt-Nielsen And Its Implications - Stolt-Nielsen S.A. V. Animalfeeds Int'l Corp., Nicholas Goodrich
Dispensing Injustice: Stolt-Nielsen And Its Implications - Stolt-Nielsen S.A. V. Animalfeeds Int'l Corp., Nicholas Goodrich
Journal of Dispute Resolution
The immediate effect of the holding was to allow a group of corporate defendants to use their superior bargaining position in the contracting process to effectively shield themselves from liability. Although Stolt-Nielsen involved business entities, the case also has implications in the consumer context. If the Court were to extend the reasoning of the case to disputes involving adhesion contracts, corporations would enjoy this immunity in the context of consumer disputes. Far from a hypothetical exercise in the reaches of Supreme Court jurisprudence, the Court is expected to decide this very issue during the 2010 term. In light of these …
Corporations Beware: The Eighth Circuit Announces New Criteria For Parent Corporation Liability And Constructive Notice Of Harassment, Lawrence S. Hall
Corporations Beware: The Eighth Circuit Announces New Criteria For Parent Corporation Liability And Constructive Notice Of Harassment, Lawrence S. Hall
Missouri Law Review
In Sandoval v. American Building Maintenance Inc., the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit announced two very important principles affecting corporations in regard to harassment liability. First, in looking at parent-subsidiary corporate relationships, the court re-established a four-factor test, which was vacated by the Eighth Circuit in 2007, that determines whether a parent corporation can be held liable for the acts of its subsidiaries. Second, when looking at a hostile work environment claim, the Eighth Circuit held that events involving harassment at multiple locations of which the defendant corporation was aware can be admitted to show that …
Missouri's Second Injury Fund - Should It Stay Or Should It Go: An Examination Of The Question Facing The Missouri State Legislature, Jason R. Mcclitis
Missouri's Second Injury Fund - Should It Stay Or Should It Go: An Examination Of The Question Facing The Missouri State Legislature, Jason R. Mcclitis
Missouri Law Review
This Law Summary will start by explaining the concepts underlying the Fund within the workers' compensation system. It will then move to an indepth look at the Fund's recent developments in the judicial, executive, and legislative arenas. Finally, this Law Summary will analyze and attempt to answer the ultimate question facing the 2009 state legislature: what should be done with the Fund? This will include an examination of the Fund's future liability under its current claims and the Schoemehl decision, the need for the Fund in the wake on anti-disability discrimination laws, and adjustments and alternatives for the legislature to …
Design Defects, David G. Owen
Design Defects, David G. Owen
Missouri Law Review
This Article examines the tests of design defectiveness developed by the courts, particularly in applying the doctrine of Restatement (Second) of Torts § 402A. The Third Restatement's definition of design defectiveness is examined in Part VIII.
States Starting To Offer Legal Protection For Apology, Richard C. Reuben
States Starting To Offer Legal Protection For Apology, Richard C. Reuben
Faculty Publications
There is a small trend a-foot in the state legislatures, and a welcome one at that: Providing some legal protection for people who want to apologize for their role in a harm, but who are fearful because of the possibility that their apologies will later be used against them in legal proceedings.
The Insurer's Right To Reimbursement Of Defense Costs, Robert H. Jerry Ii
The Insurer's Right To Reimbursement Of Defense Costs, Robert H. Jerry Ii
Faculty Publications
This Article examines the theoretical justification for the insurer's asserted right to reimbursement of defense costs incurred in defending noncovered claims. Part I sketches some details about the duty to defend which are necessary prerequisites to exploring any claim to a right of reimbursement. Part II discusses the rationale offered by most courts and commentators for recognizing the right to reimbursement: under the law of restitution, the insurer who defends a noncovered claim bestows a benefit on the policyholder which, in justice, ought to be returned. This Part concludes that a reasoned argument can be made in support of the …
Misappropriation Theory As A Permissible Basis Of Section 10(B) Liability, The, Heather L. Reinsch
Misappropriation Theory As A Permissible Basis Of Section 10(B) Liability, The, Heather L. Reinsch
Missouri Law Review
Whether the misappropriation theory is a permissible basis for liability under section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act is an issue that has split the U.S. Courts of Appeals. The issue turns on the statutory interpretation of section 10(b) and Rule 10b-5, as well as policy considerations. The Supreme Court finally settled the issue in United States v. O'Hagan, when it reversed the Eighth Circuit and permitted the United States government to base section 10(b) liability on the misappropriation theory. The effect of the Court's decision is to make a person liable under section 10(b) if he received material and …
Consent, Contract, And The Responsibilities Of Insurance Defense Counsel, Robert H. Jerry Ii
Consent, Contract, And The Responsibilities Of Insurance Defense Counsel, Robert H. Jerry Ii
Faculty Publications
This paper examines some of the assumptions on which many contemporary assessments of defense counsel's relationship with the insurer and the policyholder rest, contends that some of the current turmoil in this area is traceable to shaky assumptions, and argues that the drafting of clearer liability insurance contracts would add stability to the relationships. Part I briefly describes the current uncertainty confronting policyholders and defense counsel. Part II explores what the most widely-used liability insurance contracts say about the responsibilities of insurance defense counsel, examining both the context in which these policies are sold and the texts themselves. It contends …
Cause-In-Fact In Missouri: A Return To Normalcy, Christopher M. Hohn
Cause-In-Fact In Missouri: A Return To Normalcy, Christopher M. Hohn
Missouri Law Review
In order to establish liability in most tort actions, a plaintiff must show that the defendant "caused" the injury or harm in question. This Note focuses on the cause-in-fact requirement discussed in the Missouri Supreme Court case, Callahan v. Cardinal Glennon Hospital. In Callahan , the court dispelled much of the confusion that has plagued Missouri cause-in-fact analysis.' The court clearly expounded the test for cause-in-fact questions. Furthermore, the court explained the exception to the basic test, and clarified Missouri law regarding this essential element of tort liability.
The Scope Of Liability Under Section 12 Of The Federal Securities Act Of 1933: 'Participation' And The Pertinent Legislative Materials, Douglas E. Abrams
The Scope Of Liability Under Section 12 Of The Federal Securities Act Of 1933: 'Participation' And The Pertinent Legislative Materials, Douglas E. Abrams
Faculty Publications
Section 12 of the Securities Act of 1933 creates two private rights of action, each providing in relevant part that ‘ a ny person who offers or sells a security . . . shall be liable to the person purchasing such security from him . . ..’ Because suit may be maintained only by the person who purchases the security from defendant, an offeror may incur section 12 liability only if the offeror also ‘sells' the security to the plaintiff. Section 12(1) imposes liability on any seller whose offer or sale violates the Act's registration or prospectus requirements found in …