Law Commons^™

Climate Change And Government Negligence Liability In Massachusetts, Melissa Chalek

Marine Affairs Institute Staff Publications

No abstract provided.

A Few Thoughts On “If A Tree Falls In A Roadway . . . .”, David Eggert

Washington and Lee Law Review

This Response to Ian McElhaney’s note examines (1) the background legal context that got us to where we are on falling-tree liability; (2) how this peculiar issue fits into Virginia’s general approach to the law; and (3) presents some thoughts on Mr. McElhaney’s reasoning and ultimate conclusions in urging liability for road maintainers.

In Search Of A Unified Theory Of The Duties Flowing From Property Ownership In Virginia: A Response To Mcelhaney’S If A Tree Falls, E. Kyle Mcnew

Washington and Lee Law Review

In his Note, Ian McElhaney concludes that the Court got it right in Cline v. Dunlora South, LLC—that the landowner owes no duty to protect travelers on adjoining roadways from natural conditions on the landowner’s property—because the Court also got it right in Cline v. Commonwealth when it held that the Commonwealth of Virginia may have that duty instead. In the narrowest view, that is certainly a defensible position. If the case is just about natural conditions and roads, then there is intuitive appeal in saying that they are the Commonwealth’s roads; so, it is the Commonwealth’s job to make …

If A Tree Falls In A Roadway, Is Anyone Liable?: Proposing The Duty Of Reasonable Care For Virginia’S Road-Maintaining Entities, Ian J. Mcelhaney

Washington and Lee Law Review

This Note considers whether a duty for road-maintaining entities is tenable under Virginia law. It also explores the rationale for imposing differing liabilities between landowners and road-maintaining entities. Part III reviews the various duties other states use with respect to dangerous roadside trees and concludes that the duty of reasonable care is most appropriate for Virginia. Sovereign immunity is a companion issue and is addressed in Part IV. The Part provides a brief overview of the policy arguments for sovereign immunity, before reviewing immunity’s impact at the state, county, and municipal levels. The Part also addresses a government employee’s entitlement …

Not Fully Discretionary: Incorporating A Factor-Based Standard Into The Ftca's Discretionary Function Exception, Daniel Cohen

Northwestern University Law Review

The Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA) pulls back the curtain of sovereign immunity and allows private citizens to directly sue the federal government for damages resulting from negligence. Passed in 1946 and never amended, the statute carries no limit on potential damages, only prohibiting punitive damages and jury trials. Other than those procedural limitations, the potential liability of the government is unlimited—except for one single exception: the discretionary function exception. The discretionary function exception shields the government from liability for “the failure to exercise or perform a discretionary function or duty.” Congress failed to elaborate on the definition and scope …

Lewis V. Clarke, Summer L. Carmack

Public Land & Resources Law Review

One manner in which Indian tribes exercise their inherent sovereignty is by asserting sovereign immunity. In Lewis v. Clarke, the Court decided that the sovereign immunity extended to instrumentalities of tribes did not further extend to tribal employees acting within the scope of their employment. The Court acknowledged the concerns of the lower court, namely, the possibility of setting a precedent allowing future plaintiffs to sidestep a tribe’s sovereign immunity by suing a tribal employee in his individual capacity. However, the Supreme Court ultimately felt that the immunity of tribal employees should not exceed the immunity extended to state …

"Should" Or "Must"?: Distinguishing Mandates From Guidlines In Tort Claims Contexts, A. G. Harmon

West Virginia Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Tort Liability Of The Classroom Teacher, Stephen R. Ripps

Akron Law Review

THIS ARTICLE WILL DISCUSS the tort liabilities to which classroom teachers are exposed and predict future parameters of concern. The rules of law applicable to the tortious conduct of the classroom teachers equally affect elementary, secondary, and higher education instructors

Sovereign Immunity For Political Subdivisions, Kathy Sue Magoline

Akron Law Review

The Ohio Supreme Court continued in 1983 to expand and define its abrogation of the doctrine of sovereign immunity for municipal corporations and political subdivisions. The court's decisions in this area have resulted in a significant increase in tort liability for local governments and school districts, who may now be found liable for tortious acts in the same manner as private individuals.

A Blanket Of Immunity Will Not Keep Florida Dry: Proposed Adjustments To Florida's Drainage Regulations And Sovereign Immunity Laws To Account For Climate Change Impacts, Theresa K. Bowley

Florida A & M University Law Review

Addressing stormwater drainage in Florida has been an ongoing challenge since the middle of the twentieth century when the State began to experience rapid growth. Drainage problems already occur in Florida during seasonal high tides, heavy rains, and in storm surge events, and the impacts projected by climate change will exacerbate flooding. Identification of deficiencies in Florida’s existing drainage systems should include the responsibility and liability of drainage systems to be retrofitted to adapt to climate change. Part I of this paper explains the connection between global climate change and its effects on stormwater drainage in Florida. The existing governmental …

A Jurisprudential Divide In U.S. V. Wong & U.S. V. June, Richard J. Peltz-Steele

Faculty Publications

In spring 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court decided two consolidated cases construing the Federal Tort Claims Act, U.S. v. Kwai Fun Wong and U.S. v June, Conservator. The Court majority, 5-4, per Justice Kagan, ruled in favor of the claimants and against the Government in both cases. On the face of the majority opinions, Wong and June come off as straightforward matters of statutory construction. But under the surface, the cases gave the Court a chance to wrestle with fundamental questions of statutory interpretation. The divide in Wong and June concerns the role of the courts vis-à-vis Congress — one …

Denying Reparation For Slave And Forced Laborers In World War Ii And The Ensuing Humanitarian Rights Implications: A Case Study Of The Icj’S Recent Decision In Jurisdictional Immunities Of The State (Ger. V. It.: Greece Intervening), Morgan L. Klinzing

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

The Perfect Storm, An Imperfect Response, And A Sovereign Shield: Can Hurricane Katrina Victims Bring Negligence Claims Against The Government?, Tarak Anada

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Law Casebook Description And Table Of Contents: Constitutional Environmental And Natural Resources Law [Outline], Jim May, Robin Craig

The Future of Natural Resources Law and Policy (Summer Conference, June 6-8)

6 pages.

"James May, Widener University School of Law" -- Agenda

A Missed Opportunity: The Federal Tort Claims Act And Civil Rights Actions, Diana Hassel

Oklahoma Law Review

No abstract provided.

Torts: Anderson V. Eichner--Although Faculty Physicians, Resident Physicians, And Interns Face Private Tort Liability For Medical Malpractice, The State Is Immune, Christa L. Britton

Oklahoma Law Review

No abstract provided.

Prior Written Notice Statutes In New York State: The Resurrection Of Sovereign Immunity, Lewis J. Lubell

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Reconceptualizing Sovereign Immunity, Harold J. Krent

Vanderbilt Law Review

The United States generally is immune from suit without its con- sent. Accordingly, neither Congress nor the executive branch need pay damages' for any contract breached, any tort committed, or any constitutional right violated by the federal government. Although the doctrine of sovereign immunity persists, it persists subject to near unanimous condemnation from commentators. Many have rejected the underlying theory that the "King can do no wrong" as oddly out of place in our republican governments and many have noted as well that sovereign immunity was never applied as comprehensively in the past as it is today. Presently, there seems …

Can A Tribal Court Be Enjoined From Exercising Jurisdiction Over Nonmembers Of The Tribe?, Richard B. Collins

Publications

No abstract provided.

A Unified Approach To State And Municipal Tort Liability In Washington, Mark Mclean Myers

Washington Law Review

This Comment examines and analyzes the two judicially created limitations on governmental tort liability in Washington. It concludes that the discretionary governmental acts immunity is a proper limitation on governmental tort liability, but that the public duty doctrine should be abandoned.

The Rise And Fall Of Sovereign Immunity In Ohio, Frank D. Celebrezze, Karen B. Hull

Cleveland State Law Review

The doctrine of sovereign immunity for municipal corporations has long reigned in Ohio. Although the judiciary and the General Assembly have imposed limitations, the doctrine has survived as a principle of Ohio law for over 140 years. However, the Supreme Court of Ohio reversed the trend and abrogated the doctrine in a series of cases in December 1982 and in the spring of the 1983 term. This comment examines the historical development of sovereign immunity for tort claims in Ohio, the limitations subsequently imposed on the immunity and its abrogation in those recent supreme court cases.

Tort—Federal Tort Claims Act—Feres Doctrine Bars Post-Discharge Failure To Warn Claim, Denise Parsons

University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review

No abstract provided.

Defining The Government's Duty Under The Federal Tort Claims Act, Thomas A. Varlan

Vanderbilt Law Review

This Recent Development traces the Supreme Court's development of the analogous private liability test and examines the recent cases applying this test. The Recent Development then analyzes the divergent approaches taken in these cases and attempts to determine when an actionable duty arises under the Act.

Recent Decisions, James M. Redwine

Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law

The instant decision should serve to stimulate discussion on both the theoretical justifications for and the practical implications of jury trials in actions against governmental defendants, and therefore, may lead to revision of the FSIA. From a theoretical perspective, although the instant court correctly noted the changes effected by the Act, it failed to perceive the full extent of Congress' power in the domestic context. Congress, by its ability to classify entities as "agencies" or "instrumentalities" of the United States, thereby exempting specific entities from the non-jury trial provisions of FTCA, has the power, in effect, to restrict the scope …

Tort Claims Against The State: Comparative And Categorical Analyses Of The Ohio Court Of Claims Act And Interpretations Of The Act In Tort Litigation Against The State, Lawrence P. Wilkins

Cleveland State Law Review

Upon passage of the Ohio Court of Claims Act of 1975, the State of Ohio waived its sovereign immunity and consented to be sued in a court established solely for that purpose. Within a relatively short period of time, the Ohio Court of Claims has made a significant imprint on the development of tort law in Ohio, distinguishing itself in its efforts to provide an effective forum for those injured by the state or one of its instrumentalities while defining the limits beyond which state liability for tortious conduct will not extend. As might be expected of a new court …

The Latest Event In The Confused History Of Municipal Tort Liability, J. Bart Budetti, Gerald L. Knight

Florida State University Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Supreme Court And The Tort Claims Act: End Of An Enlightened Era, Richard Krotseng

Cleveland State Law Review

Recent decisions of the Court interpreting the Federal Tort Claims Act, including Laird v. Nelms and Stencel Aero Engineering Corp. v. United States, and to a lesser extent, Logue v. United States and United States v. Orleans, indicate a definite shift away from the Supreme Court's broad view of the Act, towards a much narrower concept of governmental tort liability. It is the purpose of this note to document and analyze this rather drastic shift in construction of the FTCA, in light of the past precedents, legislative history and public policy.

The State As A Party Defendant: Abrogation Of Sovereign Immunity In Tort In Maryland

Maryland Law Review

No abstract provided.

Integrating Governmental And Officer Tort Liability, George A. Bermann

Faculty Scholarship

The legislative and judicial dismantling of sovereign immunity is among the more significant and celebrated reforms of recent American administrative law. In many instances, this development has given those seeking damages for wrongful governmental action their first and only defendant. Even in situations in which litigants already had a cause of action against individual public officials, making the government amenable to suit has enhanced the chances of actual recovery, since officials often lack the means to satisfy judgments rendered against them. The immunity from liability enjoyed by public officials also has undergone a complex series of changes. Though still in …

Sovereign Immunity - An Argument Con, Steven A. Sindell

Cleveland State Law Review

Under the concept of sovereign or governmental immunity, a state may not be sued in tort without its consent. This doctrine, though the subject of repeated judicial challenges, is adhered to in a significant number of jurisdictions. It is the contention of this article that the reason for the rule no longer exists and that it should, therefore, be abolished as a controlling legal principle. Moreover, it is submitted that sovereign immunity violates the due process and equal protection.