Law Commons^™

The Case Against Preemption: Vaccines & Uncertainty, Mary J. Davis

Law Faculty Scholarly Articles

This article begins with a brief recap of the state of current preemption doctrine and how it governs the interaction of federal regulation of product manufacturers and state tort actions related to the actions of those manufacturers. Second, the article provides observations on how that doctrine might apply to vaccine injury litigation. Bruesewitz v. Wyeth, Inc. involves the preemptive scope of the Vaccine Act and the unique compensation system Congress created to respond to vaccine injuries. Bruesewitz was decided on February 22, 2011, and held that design defect claims are expressly preempted by the Vaccine Act. This article endeavors …

Tell Me What You Eat, And I Will Tell Whom To Sue: Big Trouble Ahead For “Big Food"?, Richard C. Ausness

Law Faculty Scholarly Articles

Overweight consumers are seeking damages from purveyors of fast food for obesity-related health problems. Plaintiffs claim that products that are high in fat, sugar, salt and cholesterol are defective. Other potential liability theories include product category liability, failure to warn, failure to disclose nutritional information, deceptive advertising, and negligent marketing. However, in order to prevail at trial, plaintiffs must overcome problems with causation, duty and proximate cause, shifting responsibility, federal preemption, comparative fault, and assumption of risk. If such litigation is successful, it may induce fast-food companies to produce healthier products. Nevertheless, this Article concludes that the problem of obesity, …

Toward Justice In Tobacco Policymaking: A Critique Of Hanson And Logue And An Alternative Approach To The Costs Of Cigarettes, Richard C. Ausness, Paul A. Lebel

Law Faculty Scholarly Articles

Much of tobacco policymaking has been driven by economic and political forces. Professors LeBel and Ausness offer an alternative approach to tobacco policymaking that places justice concerns at the center of the analysis. Their article presents a detailed critique of a significant recent work by Professors Hanson and Logue advocating extensive tobacco industry liability on economic efficiency grounds. Asserting that a “fresh start” is necessary, LeBel and Ausness identify the interests at play in the tobacco policy arena. Instead of an ambiguous "interest balancing" approach, they construct a policy model that grounds those interests in justice considerations, demonstrating how claims …

Mass Tort Litigation: Congress's Silent, But Deadly, Reform Effort, Mary J. Davis

Law Faculty Scholarly Articles

This article explores the ways in which The Common Sense Product Liability and Legal

Reform Act (“Act”) treats mass tort litigation issues. The Act does so both directly and indirectly. The direct methods of reform are mostly industry-specific and, thus, almost inconsequential in contrast to the indirect treatment. The indirect, almost clandestine, methods of reform are the most insidious and provide the most cause for concern as Congress once again attempts to "reform" products liability by reintroducing the Act in 1997. Given the President's early indication that a reform measure could meet with his approval, but that this one in …

A Comparative Negligence Checklist To Avoid Future Unnecessary Litigation, John M. Rogers, Randy Donald Shaw

Law Faculty Scholarly Articles

Systems of comparative negligence, whereby the negligence of a plaintiff serves to reduce rather than to preclude tort recovery in negligence, have been adopted in thirty-nine states. The common law rule that contributory negligence is an absolute bar to recovery is still the law in Kentucky, although modified by the doctrine of "last clear chance." Kentucky may soon join the trend toward comparative negligence, however. In the last legislative session, bills to adopt comparative negligence were introduced in both the House of Representatives and the Senate. A hearing on this subject was held by the Interim Judiciary and Civil Procedure …