Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Law Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Journal

Fordham Law Review

Liability

Torts

Articles 1 - 2 of 2

Full-Text Articles in Law

"A Distinction Without A Difference"?: Bartlett Going Forward, Steven A. Schwartz Oct 2015

"A Distinction Without A Difference"?: Bartlett Going Forward, Steven A. Schwartz

Fordham Law Review

This Note addresses the question of whether federal law preempts state design defect claims against generic drug manufacturers regardless of which test state law uses to determine whether a drug is defective. This issue, arising out of the U.S. Supreme Court's interpretation of preemption jurisprudence and fundamental tort law as stated in Mutual Pharmaceutical Co. v. Bartlett, is significant because it plays a large role in determining to what extent generic drug manufacturers are immune to civil liability arising out of injuries caused by their generic drugs. In an age of rising medical costs and jury awards, both plaintiff …


The Future Of Emotional Harm, Betsy J. Grey Apr 2015

The Future Of Emotional Harm, Betsy J. Grey

Fordham Law Review

Why should tort law treat claims for emotional harm as a second-class citizen? Judicial skepticism about these claims is long entrenched, justified by an amalgam of perceived problems ranging from proof difficulties for causation and the need to constrain fraudulent claims, to the ubiquity of the injury, and a concern about open-ended liability. To address this jumble of justifications, the law has developed a series of duty limitations to curb the claims and preclude them from reaching the jury for individualized analysis. The limited duty approach to emotional harm is maintained by the latest iteration of the Restatement (Third) of …