Law Commons^™

The Role Of Fault In § 1983 Municipal Liability, Michael Wells

Scholarly Works

Under Monell v. Department of Social Services, local governments are not vicariously liable for constitutional violations committed by their employees. Those governments, however, are liable under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for violations committed by "policymaking" officials. In the face of these two principles, courts have struggled with cases in which an underling commits a constitutional violation and the claim of municipal liability is based on a policymaker's failure to prevent it. The government can be liable in these "indirect-effect" cases for a policymaker's "deliberate indifference" to safeguarding constitutional rights, a standard that demands an even greater showing of culpability than …

Who Owes How Much? Developments In Apportionment And Joint And Several Liability Under O.C.G.A. § 51-12-33, Thomas A. Eaton

Scholarly Works

Without question, O.C.G.A. 51-12-13 as construed in McReynolds and Couch ushers in a new era in Georgia tort law. It topples the old regime in which multiple tortfeasors were held jointly liable when their combined acts of negligence injured an innocent plaintiff. The new regime is one of apportionment and liability limited to one's personal share of fault. Fault may be apportioned when it previously could not. It may be apportioned to those who are immune, to those who are unknown, and even to those who intentionally injure an innocent plaintiff. The practical consequence of this regime change is to …

Proximate Cause And The American Law Institute: The False Choice Between The "Direct Consequences" Test And The "Risk Standard", Michael Wells

Scholarly Works

This article takes a new look at an old problem that lies at the heart of tort law: How does one define the scope of liability when a negligent actor causes unforeseeable harm? This topic once drew the attention of such legal giants as Benjamin Cardozo, Robert Keeton, and William Prosser. Today it seems largely forgotten, except for a class or two in first year torts courses.

The occasion for examining the unforeseeable harm issue is the proposed revision of the Restatement (Third) of Torts by the American Law Institute ("ALI"). In a tentative draft of portions of the Restatement …

Recent Case Developments, Jeffrey W. Stempel

Scholarly Works

Recent case developments in Insurance Law in the years 2000 and 2001.

Recent Case Developments, Jeffrey W. Stempel

Scholarly Works

Recent case developments in Insurance Law in the years 2000 and 2001.

Recent Case Developments, Jeffrey W. Stempel

Scholarly Works

Recent case developments in Insurance Law in the years 1999 and 2000.

Recent Case Developments, Jeffrey W. Stempel

Scholarly Works

Recent case developments in Insurance Law in the years 1999 and 2000.

Recent Case Developments, Jeffrey W. Stempel

Scholarly Works

Recent case developments in Insurance law in the year 1998-1999.

Reason And Pollution: Construing The "Absolute" Pollution Exclusion In Context And In Light Of Its Purpose And Party Expectations, Jeffrey W. Stempel

Scholarly Works

Responding to the flurry of environmental coverage litigation over the application of the “sudden and accidental” pollution exclusion, the insurance industry during the mid-1980s largely adopted new standard pollution exclusion language for commercial general liability (CGL) policies. Since the mid-1980s, the standard form CGL has included the so-called absolute pollution exclusion, which provides that the insurance does not apply to bodily injury or property damage “arising out of the actual, alleged or threatened discharge, dispersal, seepage, migration, release, or escape of pollutants.” A “pollutant” is defined as “any solid, liquid, gaseous or thermal irritant or contaminant, including smoke, vapor, soot, …

Recent Case Developments, Jeffrey W. Stempel

Scholarly Works

Recent case developments in Insurance Law in years 1998 and 1999.

Recent Case Developments, Jeffrey W. Stempel

Scholarly Works

Recent case developments in Insurance law in the year 1998.

Revisiting The Intersection Of Workers' Compensation And Product Liability: An Assessment Of A Proposed Federal Solution To An Old Problem, Thomas A. Eaton

Scholarly Works

This article addresses a less publicized, but potentially far reaching provision of the Product Liability Legal Reform Act of 1996: the provision pertaining to the intersection of product liability and workers' compensation. The prototypical case is one in which an employee is injured on the job and the injury is caused, at least in part, by a defective product. In many instances, the employer may also be at fault. This scenario potentially calls into play both the product liability and the workers' compensation systems, raising certain relevant questions. Can the employee secure compensation benefits from the employer and tort damages …