Law Commons^™

Locating Liability For Medical Ai, W. Nicholson Price Ii, I. Glenn Cohen

Articles

When medical AI systems fail, who should be responsible, and how? We argue that various features of medical AI complicate the application of existing tort doctrines and render them ineffective at creating incentives for the safe and effective use of medical AI. In addition to complexity and opacity, the problem of contextual bias, where medical AI systems vary substantially in performance from place to place, hampers traditional doctrines. We suggest instead the application of enterprise liability to hospitals—making them broadly liable for negligent injuries occurring within the hospital system—with an important caveat: hospitals must have access to the information needed …

Should Automakers Be Responsible For Accidents?, Kyle D. Logue

Articles

Motor vehicles are among the most dangerous products sold anywhere. Automobiles pose a larger risk of accidental death than any other product, except perhaps opioids. Annual autocrash deaths in the United States have not been below 30,000 since the 1940s, reaching a recent peak of roughly 40,000 in 2016. And the social cost of auto crashes goes beyond deaths. Auto-accident victims who survive often incur extraordinary medical expenses. Those crash victims whose injuries render them unable to work experience lost income. Auto accidents also cause nontrivial amounts of property damage—mostly to the automobiles themselves, but also to highways, bridges, or …

The Deterrence Case For Comprehensive Automaker Enterprise Liability, Kyle D. Logue

Journal of Law and Mobility

This Article lays out the potential (at this point purely theoretical) deterrence benefits of replacing our current auto tort regime (including auto products liability law, driver-based negligence claims, and auto no-fault regimes) with a single, comprehensive automaker enterprise liability system. This new regime would apply not only to Level 5 vehicles, but to all automobiles made and sold to be driven on public roads. Because such a system would make automakers unconditionally responsible for the economic losses resulting from any crashes of their vehicles, it would in effect make automakers into auto insurers as well, although such a change will …

Product-Related Risk And Cognitive Biases: The Shortcomings Of Enterprise Liability, James A. Henderson Jr., Jeffrey J. Rachlinski

Jeffrey J. Rachlinski

Products liability law has witnessed a long debate over whether manufacturers should be held strictly liable for the injuries that products cause. Recently, some have argued that psychological research on human judgment supports adopting a regime of strict enterprise liability for injuries caused by product design. These new proponents of enterprise liability argue that the current system, in which manufacturer liability for product design turns on the manufacturer's negligence, allows manufacturers to induce consumers into undertaking inefficiently dangerous levels or types of consumption. In this paper we argue that the new proponents of enterprise liability have: (1) not provided any …

California Expands Tort Liability Under The Novel Market Share Theory: Sindell V. Abbott Laboratories, N. Denise Taylor

Pepperdine Law Review

The California Supreme Court, in the novel and unprecedented case of Sindell v. Abbott Laboratories, eliminated the plaintiffs burden of identification of a negligent party, and thus the causation requirement, in a multiple party tort action. In the course of this decision, the court adopted the "market share" theory of liability which dictated in Sindell that nonidentifiable defendant-manufacturers of the generic drug DES would be liable for the damages in proportion to their share of business in the market. The author thoroughly examines various theories of recovery, such as "alternative liability," "concert of action" and "enterprise liability," which the court …

The Death Of Causation: Mass Products Torts' Incomplete Incorporation Of Social Welfare Principles, Donald G. Gifford

Donald G Gifford

Legal actions against the manufacturers of disease-causing products, such as cigarettes and asbestos insulation, have redefined the landscape of tort liability during the past generation. These actions bedevil courts, because any particular victim often is unable to identify the manufacturer whose product caused her harm. Increasingly, but inconsistently, courts allow victims to recover without proof of individualized causation. This article argues that instrumental approaches seek to turn mass products tort law into the equivalent of a social welfare program, not unlike workers’ compensation or Social Security. As with any such program, the accident compensation system must include compensation entitlement boundaries, …

Conspiracy Theories: Is There A Place For Civil Conspiracy In Products Liability Litigation?, Richard C. Ausness

Law Faculty Scholarly Articles

A civil conspiracy is a group of two or more persons acting together to achieve an unlawful objective or to achieve a lawful objective by unlawful or criminal means. During the past two decades, plaintiffs have brought numerous civil conspiracy claims against product manufacturers. The defendants in these cases have included manufacturers or producers of tobacco products, asbestos, pharmaceuticals, lead-based paint, multi-rim truck wheels, and gasoline additives. Surprisingly, less than half of the civil conspiracy claims have made it to trial. This unimpressive success rate suggests that courts are not very receptive to civil conspiracy claims even when there is …

The Death Of Causation: Mass Products Torts' Incomplete Incorporation Of Social Welfare Principles, Donald G. Gifford

Faculty Scholarship

Legal actions against the manufacturers of disease-causing products, such as cigarettes and asbestos insulation, have redefined the landscape of tort liability during the past generation. These actions bedevil courts, because any particular victim often is unable to identify the manufacturer whose product caused her harm. Increasingly, but inconsistently, courts allow victims to recover without proof of individualized causation. This article argues that instrumental approaches seek to turn mass products tort law into the equivalent of a social welfare program, not unlike workers’ compensation or Social Security. As with any such program, the accident compensation system must include compensation entitlement boundaries, …

Tort Liability For The Sale Of Non-Defective Products: An Analysis And Critique Of The Concept Of Negligent Marketing, Richard C. Ausness

Law Faculty Scholarly Articles

This Article will evaluate the concept of negligent marketing to see whether it ought to become a part of our legal jurisprudence or whether it should be discarded as doctrinally unsound, possibly harmful to important social and economic interests.

Part II of this Article provides an overview of the negligent marketing theory. Negligent marketing can be divided into three categories: (1) product designs that make the product more attractive to criminals; (2) advertising and promotional activities that target inappropriate users; and (3) product distribution practices that facilitate retail sales of dangerous products to vulnerable or unsuitable users. The first category …

Ethics Of Enterprise Liability In Product Design And Marketing Litigation, James A. Henderson Jr.

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

American courts talk as though they are imposing strict enterprise liability on product manufacturers, but in truth they do so only with respect to manufacturing defects. In product design and marketing litigation, manufacturers' liability is based on fault. The reason why strict liability is inappropriate for the generic product hazards associated with design and marketing is that, in sharp contrast to manufacturing defects, the conditions necessary for insurance to function are not satisfied. Users and consumers control generic product risks to a sufficiently great extent that any insurance scheme based on strict enterprise liability would be destroyed by combinations of …

Medical Errors: Causes, Cures, And Capitalism, Keith Myers

Journal of Law and Health

This article explores the causes of medical error, the medical profession's responses to errors, and how the legal system responds to medical error through litigation and legislation. Part II discusses the definition of "medical error," the frequency and pervasiveness of the problem, and the causes at the individual and system level. Part III considers how the culture of medicine has largely failed to address medical errors as a systems-based problem, and how the legal culture discourages admitting errors due to the threat of litigation. Focusing on systems, data must be collected and analyzed, and legal guidelines developed to encourage error …

The Theory Of Enterprise Liability And Common Law Strict Liability, Gregory C. Keating

Vanderbilt Law Review

The fundamental claim that the Restatement (Third) of Torts: General Principles makes about strict liability is striking and bold. The Restatement (Third) claims that there are only special instances of strict liability. Negligence is a general legal principle, but strict liability is a set of particular doctrines. Curiously, however, the Restatement (Third) also takes the position that strict liability is a unified form of liability; it characterizes strict liability as liability for the characteristic risks of an activity.' So the Restatement (Third)'s claim that strict liability is a set of special cases seems to be a claim that strict liability …

Product-Related Risk And Cognitive Biases: The Shortcomings Of Enterprise Liability, James A. Henderson Jr., Jeffrey J. Rachlinski

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

Products liability law has witnessed a long debate over whether manufacturers should be held strictly liable for the injuries that products cause. Recently, some have argued that psychological research on human judgment supports adopting a regime of strict enterprise liability for injuries caused by product design. These new proponents of enterprise liability argue that the current system, in which manufacturer liability for product design turns on the manufacturer's negligence, allows manufacturers to induce consumers into undertaking inefficiently dangerous levels or types of consumption. In this paper we argue that the new proponents of enterprise liability have: (1) not provided any …

Emerging Trends For Products Liability: Market Share Liability, Its History And Future, Frank J. Giliberti

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

An Insurance-Based Compensation System For Product-Related Injuries, Richard C. Ausness

Law Faculty Scholarly Articles

In recent years, an increasing number of commentators have begun to express doubts about the effectiveness of the tort system. According to these critics, tort law does not deter accidents, nor does it spread accident costs efficiently. Worst of all, the tort system is extremely expensive to operate. Some of this criticism has spilled over into the products liability area. Products liability law has been condemned as expensive, ineffective, and regressive; in addition, it has been blamed for higher product prices, foreign competition, problems within the liability insurance industry, corporate bankruptcies, lack of product development, and the removal of useful …

Some Thoughts On The Ideology Of Enterprise Llability, Robert L. Rabin

Maryland Law Review

No abstract provided.

Rescuing The Revolution: The Revived Case For Enterprise Liability, Steven P. Croley, Jon D. Hanson

Michigan Law Review

The article proceeds as follows. Part I defines important terms and introduces the two-by-four Products Liability Matrix by explaining the eight possible positions that might be taken with respect to the mutability and liability-standard dimensions of products liability. Part II provides a backdrop for the current products liability debate, first by setting out a capsule history of the evolution of the modem products liability regime, and then by explaining the arguments offered by the "first generation" of products liability scholars to justify expanded manufacturer liability. Part II also illustrates the utility of the Products Liability Matrix by locating many of …

The Unworkability Of Court-Made Enterprise Liability: A Reply To Geistfeld, James A. Henderson Jr., Aaron Twerski

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

The First-Party Insurance Externality: An Economic Justification For Enterprise Liability, Jon D. Hanson, Kyle D. Logue

Articles

This Article explores the insurance and deterrence implications of important and long overlooked facts. Consumers are insured through first-party mechanisms against most of the risks of product accidents. However, first-party insurers rarely and imperfectly adjust premiums according to an individual consumer's decisions concerning exactly what products she will purchase, how many of those products she will purchase, and how carefully she will consume them. Such consumer decisions we refer to as "consumption choices. " This failure by first-party insurers to adjust premiums according to consumption choices gives rise to a first-party insurance externality. Based on this insight, this Article offers …

Book Review: Deforming Tort Reform, Joseph A. Page

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

The storms buffeting the tort system over the past two decades have come in three distinct waves. In the late 1960s, steep increases in the insurance costs incurred by health care providers protecting against negligence claims by patients triggered what came to be known as the "medical malpractice crisis." In the mid-1970s, manufacturers whose liability insurance premiums suddenly soared raised obstreperous complaints that called public attention to the existence of a "product liability crisis." Finally, other groups whose activities created risks exposing them to lawsuits found that their liability insurance rates had also risen precipitously. A full-blown "torts crisis" was …

The Boundary Problems Of Enterprise Liability , James A. Henderson Jr.

Maryland Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Boundary Problems Of Enterprise Liability, James A. Henderson Jr.

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

The Enterprise Liability Theory Of Torts, Howard C. Klemme

Publications

No abstract provided.

Workmen's Compensation: Toward A Stricter Liability For Enterprise, John A. Payne Jr.

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

This article considers the situation in which an employee injured by a defective product in the course of his employment can proceed both against his employer insured by a workmen's compensation program and against a manufacturer of the employer's equipment who is strictly liable under a claim of products liability. The focus is not on the manufacturer as employer but on the manufacturer as supplier of defective equipment which causes injury. This is the best situation for analyzing the problems arising from the present system for distributing losses because, where the negligence of the employer has been an independent cause …