Law Commons^™

Reassessing Charitable Immunity In Virginia, Carl Tobias

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.

Assumption Of Responsibility And Loss Of Bargain In Tort Law, Russell Brown

Dalhousie Law Journal

The author seeks to justify recovery in negligence law for loss of bargain, which is the pure economic loss incurred by a subsequent purchaser of a defective product or building structure in seeking to repair the defect. The difficulty is that the purchaser is not in a relationship of contractual privity with the manufacturer The conflicting approaches in Anglo-American tort law reveal confusion, owing to loss of bargain's dual implication of the law governing pure economic loss and products liability. These difficulties are overcome by drawing from Hedley Byrne's requirements of a defendant's assumption of responsibility and a plaintiff's reasonable …

The Welding Fume Case And The Preemptive Effect Of Osha’S Hazcom Standard On Common Law Failure-To-Warn Claims, Richard C. Ausness

Law Faculty Scholarly Articles

The Occupational Health and Safety Act (the OSH Act) affects more than ninety million workers in the United States. The OSH Act is administered by the Occupational Health and Safety Administration (OSHA), which promulgates health and safety standards for the workplace. Although OSHA standards do not regulate product manufacturers directly, they may affect liability when manufacturers are sued by workers who are injured by allegedly defective products provided by their employers. With increasing frequency, manufacturers are contending that the OSH Act or OSHA standards preempt these claims. In particular, manufacturers argue that the Hazard Communication Standard (HazCom Standard) should preempt …

Re-Thinking Whitbread V. Walley: Liberal Justice And The Judicial Review Of Damages Caps Under Section 7 Of The Charter Of Rights And Freedoms, Jeremy Taylor

Dalhousie Law Journal

This paper advances a theoretically-driven reconstruction of s.7 Charter doctrine, which currently precludes protection for personal injury damages. Proceeding from a standpoint built on deontological strains of tort theory, the author dissects the reasoning in Whitbread v. Walley, the governing authority on the applicability of s. 7 to legislated damages caps. In three stages, the author argues that in the contemporary context, theoretical and doctrinal support for Whitbread is weak. First, when tort rights are theorized non-instrumentally, rights to personal injury damages fall squarely within the irreducible sphere of personal autonomy now protected by s. 7. Second, recent developments, both …

“After You, My Dear Alphonse!”: Should The Courts Defer To The Fda’S New Interpretation Of § 360k(A) Of The Medical Device Amendments?, Richard C. Ausness

Law Faculty Scholarly Articles

Under the provisions of the Medical Device Amendments (MDA) to the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act certain medical devices are subject to premarket approval of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Section 360k(a) of the MDA provides that states may not establish “any requirement” which relates to safety or effectiveness of a medical device and "which is different from, or in addition to" any requirement imposed by the FDA. Until recently, the FDA maintained that § 360k(a) did not preempt most common law tort claims; however, in recent amici briefs, the FDA has aggressively asserted that most, if not all, …

Let The Damages Fit The Wrong: An Immodest Proposal For Reforming Personal Injury Damages, Elaine W. Shoben

Scholarly Works

The modern legislative approach to tort reform has been a piecemeal process of altering single rules rather than reconsidering the fundamental principle of compensatory damages--the goal of making victims whole. When some aspect of damage doctrine has become disfavored, such as joint and several liability, legislatures and sometimes courts have made a change in that one rule. Lawmakers have focused little on the overall remedial scheme in tort and even less on the basic premise of compensatory damages and whether it is still justifiable.

Rather than comment on the wisdom of piecemeal reform, this article questions the premise of compensatory …

Do Ask And Do Tell: Rethinking The Lawyer’S Duty To Warn In Domestic Violence Cases, Margaret B. Drew, Sarah Buel

Faculty Publications

Empirical data document that while domestic violence victims face high risk of recurring abuse, batterers’ lawyers may be privy to information that could avert further harm. Attorneys owe a duty of confidentiality to their clients that can be breached only in extraordinary circumstances, such as when counsel learns her client plans to commit a crime. To resolve the tension between client confidentiality and victim safety, this Article argues that, in the context of domestic violence cases, lawyers have an affirmative duty to (1) screen battering clients who have indicated a likelihood of harming others, (2) attempt to dissuade them from …

A Restatement (Third) Of Intentional Torts?, Kenneth Simons

Faculty Scholarship

Some intentional tort doctrines have developed in intriguing ways since the Restatement Second was published, and other doctrines remain contentious or obscure. For example, disagreement persists about whether the tort of battery requires merely the (single) intent to make a nonconsensual contact, or the (dual) intent both (1) to contact and (2) either to harm or to offend. The single intent view is much more plausible; the dual intent view cannot make much sense of the liability of well-intentioned doctors for battery if they exceed the patient's consent, or the liability of pranksters, or the well-accepted doctrine of apparent consent. …

Torts And Choice Of Law: Searching For Principles, Keith N. Hylton

Faculty Scholarship

If a tortious act (e.g., negligently firing a rifle) occurs in state X and the harm (e.g., killing a bystander) occurs in state Y, which state's law should apply? This is a simple example of the choice of law problem in torts. The problem arises between states or provinces with different laws within one nation and between different nations. In this article I discuss this problem largely in terms of incentive effects and also consider where this topic might be addressed in a torts course.

Products Liability In The Twenty-First Century: A Review Of Owen’S Products Liability Law, Richard C. Ausness

Law Faculty Scholarly Articles

Professor Richard C. Ausness reviews Products Liability Law, a treatise by David Owen.

Insufficient Causes, David A. Fischer

Faculty Publications

This article analyzes a difficult causation question. If a force is not independently sufficient to bring about an injury, under what circumstances should a court find the force to be a cause of the injury? The question has practical importance. It frequently arises in litigation involving toxic torts and products liability failure to warn. The article includes a critique of the NESS test of causation as it pertains to this issue. This article explores this weakness of the NESS test in the context of insufficient causes, and offers important new insights with respect to the limitations of the NESS test. …