Law Commons^™

Distinguishing The Concept Of Strict Liability For Ultra-Hazardous Activities From Strict Products Liability Under Section 402a Of The Restatement (Second) Of Torts: Two Parallel Lines Of Reasoning That Should Never Meet, Charles E. Cantu

Akron Law Review

The cornerstone of tort law in our Anglo-American system of jurisprudence is based upon three generally accepted principles. The first is that by awarding any individual monetary damages after their injury, we can make them whole, and the second is the concept of the reasonable prudent person. The third, and the focal point of this article, is that liability is imposed, and the corresponding right to recovery is created, not because of the fact that the plaintiff is injured, but because the injury is the result of the defendant’s fault.

Fault, as each first year law student is quick to …

The Fault Of Trespass, Avihay Dorfman, Assaf Jacob

Avihay Dorfman

The conventional wisdom has it that a property owner assumes virtually no responsibility for guiding others in fulfilling their duties not to trespass on the former's property. In other words, the entire risk of making an unauthorized use of the property in question rests upon the duty-holders. This view is best captured by the Keep-Off picture of property, according to which the content of the duty in question is that of excluding oneself from a thing that is not one's own. In this article, we argue that this view is mistaken. We advance conceptual, normative, and doctrinal arguments to show …

Rethinking Principals Of Comparative Fault In Light Of California's Proposition 51, James A. Gash

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Fault At The Contract-Tort Interface, Roy Kreitner

Michigan Law Review

The formative period in the history of contract and tort (in the second half of the nineteenth century) may be characterized by the cleavage of contract and tort around the concept of fault: tort modernized by moving from strict liability to a regime of "no liability without fault," while contract moved toward strict liability. The opposing attitudes toward fault are puzzling at first glance. Nineteenth-century scholars of private law offered explanations for the opposition, reasoning that alternative ideas about fault account for the different character of state involvement in enforcing private law rights: tort law governs liabilities imposed by law …

In (Partial) Defense Of Strict Liability In Contract, Robert E. Scott

Michigan Law Review

Many scholars believe that notions of fault should and do pervade contract doctrine. Notwithstanding the normative and positive arguments in favor of a fault-based analysis of particular contract doctrines, I argue that contract liability is strict liability at its core. This core regime is based on two key prongs: (1) the promisor is liable to the promisee for breach, and that liability is unaffected by the promisor's exercise of due care or failure to take efficient precautions; and (2) the promisor's liability is unaffected by the fact that the promisee, prior to the breach, has failed to take cost-effective precautions …

A Comparative Fault Defense In Contract Law, Ariel Porat

Michigan Law Review

This Article calls for the recognition of a comparative fault defense in contract law. Part I sets the framework for this defense and suggests the situations in which it should apply. These situations are sorted under two headings: cases of noncooperation and cases of overreliance. Part II unfolds the main argument for recognizing the defense and recommends applying the defense only in cases where cooperation or avoidance of overreliance is low cost.

Fault In Contract Law, Eric A. Posner

Michigan Law Review

A promisor is strictly liable for breaching a contract, according to the standard account. However, a negligence-based system of contract law can be given an economic interpretation, and this Article shows that such a system is in some respects more attractive than the strict-liability system. This may explain why, as a brief discussion of cases shows, negligence ideas continue to play a role in contract decisions.

The Fault Principle As The Chameleon Of Contract Law: A Market Function Approach, Stefan Grundmann

Michigan Law Review

This Article begins with a comparative law survey showing that all legal systems do not opt exclusively for fault liability or strict liability in contract law, but often adopt a more nuanced approach. This approach includes intermediate solutions such as reversing the burden of proof, using a market ("objective") standard of care, distinguishing between different types of contracts, and providing a "second chance" to breaching parties. Taking this starting point seriously and arguing that it is highly unlikely that all legal systems err, this Article argues that the core question is how and when each liability regime should prevail or …

An Information Theory Of Willful Breach, Oren Bar-Gill, Omri Ben-Shahar

Michigan Law Review

Should willful breach be sanctioned more severely than inadvertent breach? Strikingly, there is sharp disagreement on this matter within American legal doctrine, in legal theory, and in comparative law. Within law-and-economics, the standard answer is "no "-breach should be subject to strict liability. Fault should not raise the magnitude of liability in the same way that no fault does not immune the breaching party from liability. In this paper, we develop an alternative law-and-economics account, which justifies supercompensatory damages for willful breach. Willful breach, we argue, reveals information about the "true nature" of the breaching party-that he is more likely …

Foreword: Fault In American Contract Law, Omri Ben-Shahar, Ariel Porat

Michigan Law Review

The basic rule of liability in tort law is fault. The basic rule of liability in contract law is no fault. This is perhaps one of the most striking divides within private law, the most important difference between the law of voluntary and nonvoluntary obligations. It is this fault line (speaking equivocally) that the present Symposium explores. Is it a real divide-two opposite branches of liability within private law-or is it merely a rhetorical myth? How can it be justified? As law-and-economics scholars, this fault/no-fault divide between contract and tort is all the more puzzling. In law and economics, legal …

The Role Of Fault In Contract Law: Unconscionability, Unexpected Circumstances, Interpretation, Mistake, And Nonperformance, Melvin Aron Eisenberg

Michigan Law Review

It is often asserted that contract law is based on strict liability, not fault. This assertion is incorrect. Fault is a basic building block of contract law, and pervades the field. Some areas of contract law, such as unconscionability, are largely fault based. Other areas, such as interpretation, include sectors that are fault based in significant part. Still other areas, such as liability for nonperformance, superficially appear to rest on strict liability, but actually rest in significant part on the fault of breaking a promise without sufficient excuse. Contract law discriminates between two types of fault: the violation of strong …

The Fault That Lies Within Our Contract Law, George M. Cohen

Michigan Law Review

Scholars and courts typically describe and defend American contract law as a system of strict liability, or liability without fault. Strict liability generally means that the reason for nonperformance does not matter in determining whether a contracting party breached. Strict liability also permeates the doctrines of contract damages, under which the reason for the breach does not matter in determining the measure of damages, and the doctrines of contract formation, under which the reason for failing to contract does not matter In my Article, I take issue with the strict liability paradigm, as I have in my prior work on …

The Many Faces Of Fault In Contract Law: Or How To Do Economics Right, Without Really Trying, Richard A. Epstein

Michigan Law Review

Modern law often rests on the assumption that a uniform cost-benefit formula is the proper way to determine fault in ordinary contract disputes. This Article disputes that vision by defending the view that different standards of fault are appropriate in different contexts. The central distinction is one that holds parties in gratuitous transactions only to the standard of care that they bring to their own affairs, while insisting on the higher objective standard of ordinary care in commercial transactions. That bifurcation leads to efficient searches. Persons who hold themselves out in particular lines of business in effect warrant their ability …

A Watershed Moment: Reversals Of Tort Theory In The Nineteenth Century, Jed Handelsman Shugerman

Faculty Scholarship

This article offers a new assessment of the stages in the development of fault and strict liability and their justifications in American history. Building from the evidence that a wide majority of state courts adopted Fletcher v. Rylands and strict liability for unnatural or hazardous activities in the late nineteenth century, a watershed moment turns to the surprising reversals in tort ideology in the wake of flooding disasters.

An established view of American tort law is that the fault rule supposedly prevailed over strict liability in the nineteenth century, with some arguing that it was based on instrumental arguments to …

Americans Abroad: International Educational Programs And Tort Liability, Vincent R. Johnson

Faculty Articles

In recent decades, the number of foreign programs operated by American colleges and universities has greatly expanded. Until recently, there were few reported cases involving claims arising from foreign educational ventures. However, the increase in international study abroad programs has been paralleled by an increase in tort claims. Additionally, because of the tendency of tort cases to be settled, the number of unreported cases, based on harm to students participating in study abroad programs, may be considerably larger than what appears in legal research databases.

Given the high cost of potential litigation, a program provider has no choice but to …

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. …

The Supreme Court And Our Culture Of Irresponsibility, Mary J. Davis

Law Faculty Scholarly Articles

This article chronicles the Supreme Court's expansion of the “culture of irresponsibility,” where institutional defendants are freed from tort liability with no check on the abuse of such immunity. Professor Davis describes the Court's progression toward immunity in products liability decisions of the past decade including East River Steamship, Boyle, Cipollone, and Lohr. Noting the effect of the Court's decisions in promoting institutional irresponsibility, Professor Davis encourages the Court to use its “cultural influence” and reconsider its broad extension of immunity which has spread to situations and institutional defendants the Court never imagined.

Comments To The Reporters And Selected Members Of The Consultative Group, Restatement Of Torts (Third): Products Liability, Howard C. Klemme

Publications

No abstract provided.

The Appropriate Role Of Plantiff Misuse In Products Liability Causes Of Action, Peter Zablotsky

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Fault Concept In Personal Injury Cases In Minnesota: Implications For Tort Reform, Michael K. Steenson

Faculty Scholarship

Legislative tort reform proposals have attempted to restore what is perceived to be an imbalance in the tort-litigation system by limiting tort recoveries. One of the motivating factors behind tort reform proposals is a concern that tort law has deviated from a fault-based system of liability. It is this concern over the structure of the fault system in Minnesota that is the subject of this Article. This Article examines Minnesota Supreme Court opinions of the 20th Century to determine whether the court's decisions deviated from a fault-based system of liability. The focus is on change, accepted and rejected. The purpose …

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 recover 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 …

Adopting Comparative Negligence: Some Thoughts For The Late Reformer, Kenneth S. Abraham

Maryland Law Review

No abstract provided.

Comparative Fault In Maryland: The Time Has Come, Edward S. Digges Jr., Robert Dale Klein

Maryland Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Enterprise Liability Theory Of Torts, Howard C. Klemme

Publications

No abstract provided.

Toward A Test For Strict Liability In Torts, Jon T. Hirschoff, Guido Calabresi

Articles by Maurer Faculty

No abstract provided.

The Hospital's New Responsibility, Arthur F. Southwick

Cleveland State Law Review

The focus for this discussion is the hospital as a corporate institution and its liability for injuries caused a patient or visitor. The fundamental question is: What legal duties does the hospital and its personnel owe the patient or the visitor? To attempt an answer to this question one must first have an understanding of the role and nature of a hospital in modern society.

Soviet Tort Law: The New Principles Annotated, Whitmore Gray

Articles

In 1961, the federal legislature, the USSR Supreme Soviet, finally adopted a skeleton code of fundamental principles of civil law.10 This recodification, which incorporates 40 years of case law and doctrinal development as well as some major innovations, will be the basis for individual civil codes to be adopted in each of the 15 union republics. While there may be some slight modifications, and certainly some variety in the degree of additional detail included in the individual codes by each republic,11 these Principles present already a fairly comprehensive picture of the shape of the future law. They are about as …

Private Insurance As A Solution To The Driver-Guest Dilemm, Harvey R. Friedman

Michigan Law Review

The duty of the driver of an automobile to his nonpaying passenger, and liability arising from the breach of that duty, has long presented a troublesome area of litigation for the courts and the parties involved. Application of standards unsuited for the peculiar risks of automotive transportation has produced inadequate compensation in some cases and excessive recoveries in others. Meanwhile, trial calendars are overcrowded with personal injury litigation, and insurance companies must bear the awards of sympathetic juries and those resulting from collusion between passenger and driver. The over-all expense of this method of determination of liability, far too little …

The Casual Relation Issue In Negligence Law, Leon Green

Michigan Law Review

Two significant legal studies of "Causation"-one English, one American-have been recently published. The English book brings to the subject more scholarly learning and a more comprehensive examination of its literature than any other book that has been written. The authors are devoted disciples of causation principles and make a stout defense of the causation concept as the structural core of negligence law. They examine the philosophical, common sense and semantic backgrounds of causal concepts as the basis of legal liability, find that they have merit, and launch extended, and sometimes devastating, attack upon theories that question their adequacy, though in …

Torts-The Duty To Rescue-"Am I My Brother's Keeper?

Michigan Law Review

A recent case, decided by the Supreme Court of Indiana, and commented upon elsewhere in this issue, involved the interesting question as to the existence of a duty to go to the aid of a person who is in helpless peril through no initial fault on the part of the defendant.