Law Commons^™

The Negligent Commercial Transaction Tort: Imposing Common Law Liability On Merchants For Sales And Leases To “Defective” Customers, Robert M. Howard

Duke Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Negligent Accounting And The Limits Of Instrumental Tort Reform, John A. Siliciano

Michigan Law Review

This article first explores the relationship between the accountant and the reliant third party, and recounts the mounting judicial hostility to the accountant's traditional privity defense. Next, the article critically examines the arguments that have supported traditional privity-based regimes. The third section turns to the reform courts and tests whether the rationales offered for reform justify abandoning the privity requirement.

Concluding that a convincing case for reform has yet to be made and - given the complexity of a properly executed instrumental analysis - may never be made, the article's final section reconsiders the utility of instrumental reasoning as a …

Self-Service Slip And Falls: Is The Storekeeper's Burden Too Great?, John Michael Robinson Jr.

Louisiana Law Review

No abstract provided.

Reflections On Willful, Wanton, Reckless, And Gross Negligence, Edwin H. Byrd Iii

Louisiana Law Review

No abstract provided.

Products Liability Law In Minnesota: Design Defect And Failure To Warn Claims, Michael K. Steenson

Faculty Scholarship

The Minnesota law of products liability underwent significant changes in the 1980s. The courts filled in gaps left open since the Minnesota Supreme Court initially adopted strict liability in McCormack v. Hankscraft Co.' in 1967, but they also raised new issues and left other issues open. This Article analyzes these developments in Minnesota products liability law. The broad focus is on standards in design and warning cases. In the course of the analysis, the Article focuses on the issues that had been left unsettled in Minnesota law in those areas. The Article first addresses the elements of a strict liability …

Exploring The Foreign Country Exception: Federal Tort Claims In Antarctica, David J. Bederman

Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law

On November 28, 1979, an Air New Zealand DC-10 aircraft carrying tourists bound for an expedition to Antarctica crashed into the side of Mount Erebus, the highest peak on the frozen continent. All aboard perished. Four years later, the families of some of the New Zealander skilled in the accident brought suit against the United States Government under the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA). They claimed that the negligence of the air traffic controllers at the United States scientific base at McMurdo Sound, Antarctica, was the proximate cause of the crash.

This Article considers numerous aspects of this litigation and …

Torts Nuisance Actions: Exempt Certain Farming Activities, C. White

Georgia State University Law Review

The Act clarifies which farming activities are protected against nuisance actions arising from urban sprawl. In addition, expansion and technological improvement of existing facilities are protected from nuisance actions. Finally, the Act contains a provision which prevents this right to farm"; law from being used as a shield for negligently operated farming activities.

Recovery Of Pure Economic Loss In Product Liability Actions: An Economic Comparison Of Three Legal Rules, Heidi A. Irvin, Mark S. Carlson

Seattle University Law Review

This Comment argues that in the allocation of pure economic loss caused by product failure, the negligence rule is generally more efficient than a strict liability rule and that a contract rule is almost always more efficient than a negligence rule. Part II presents a general discussion of the attributes of an economically efficient remedy. In Part III, three legal rules used to allocate pure economic loss are scrutinized under the standards set forth in Part II.

Computer Malpractice And Other Legal Problems Posed By Computer Vaporware, Ronald N. Weikers

Villanova Law Review

No abstract provided.

Real Persons, Corporate Persons And Vicarious Liability, Christine W. Booth

Case Western Reserve Law Review

No abstract provided.

Liability Of Parents For Conduct Of Their Child Under Section 33.01 Of The Texas Family Code: Defining The Requisite Standards Of Culpability., L. Wayne Scott

St. Mary's Law Journal

Section 33.01 of the Texas Family Code uses archaic terms and needs to be updated to eliminate confusion. This section provides an expansive statutory avenue for recovering from the parent damages previously unavailable at common law for a child's acts. However, the extent of parental liability under both of the available statutory provisions—negligence and strict liability—is disputable. While section 33.01 currently uses the terms "willful" and "malicious," these terms should be excluded in favor of "intentional" and "grossly negligent conduct." In an age when tort liability is determined more from an insurance theory than a fault theory, section 33.01 of …

Rationalizing A Decade Of Judicial Responses To Exculpatory Clauses, Anita Cava, Don Wiesner

Santa Clara Law Review

No abstract provided.

Liability Of Parents For Conduct Of Their Child Under Section 33.01 Of The Texas Family Code: Defining The Requisite Standards Of ‘Culpability’, L. Wayne Scott

Faculty Articles

Section 33.01 of the Texas Family Code uses archaic terms and needs to be updated to eliminate confusion. This section provides an expansive statutory avenue for recovering from the parent damages previously unavailable at common law for a child's acts. However, the extent of parental liability under both of the available statutory provisions—negligence and strict liability—is disputable. While section 33.01 currently uses the terms "willful" and "malicious," these terms should be excluded in favor of "intentional" and "grossly negligent conduct."

In an age when tort liability is determined more from an insurance theory than a fault theory, section 33.01 of …

Legal Malpractice, Professional Discipline, And Representation Of The Indigent Defendant, Richard Klein

Scholarly Works

No abstract provided.

Wrongful Birth And Wrongful Life Actions Arising From Negligent Genetic Counseing: The Need For Legislation Supporting Reproductive Choice, Kathryn J. Jankowski

Fordham Urban Law Journal

The Note discusses wrongful birth and wrongful life actions arising from negligent genetic counseling and explains why they should be recognized statutorily. It details the technological advances in the field of genetics and their implications for the legal duty imposed upon the medical profession. The author traces the judicial developments that led to the gradual recognition of wrongful birth actions and the refusal to recognize wrongful life actions, as well as the recent legislation that has barred both wrongful birth and wrongful life actions. The author proposes a model statute based on the following policy considerations: (1) procreative choice is …

Accountable Accountants: Is Third-Party Liability Necessary?, Victor P. Goldberg

Faculty Scholarship

Should accountants be liable to third parties if they conduct an audit in negligent manner? A half century ago, in Ultramares Corporation v. Touche, Niven & Co., Cardozo argued that they should not, unless their performance could be characterized as fraud. In recent years, courts in a minority of jurisdictions have concluded that Cardozo's argument is no longer compelling and they have found that "foreseeable" third parties could bring a tort action for ordinary negligence against the accountants. In addition to being subject to tort actions, accountants may also be liable under federal and state securities laws.

Suits against …