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

Law Commons

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

Articles 1 - 5 of 5

Full-Text Articles in Law

The Diffusion Of Doctrinal Innovations In Tort Law, Kyle Graham Oct 2015

The Diffusion Of Doctrinal Innovations In Tort Law, Kyle Graham

Marquette Law Review

This Article examines the spread of “successful” common-law doctrinal innovations in the law of torts. Its analysis reveals recurring influences upon and tendencies within the diffusion of novel tort doctrines across the states. The studied diffusion patterns also document a trend toward common-law doctrinal “stabilization” over the past quarter-century. As detailed herein, this stabilization owes in part to altered adoption dynamics associated with the ongoing shrinkage and fragmentation of the common-law tort dockets entertained by state supreme courts. Prevailing conditions will make it difficult, this Article concludes, for even well-received common-law doctrinal innovations of the future to match the rapid …


The Economic Loss Doctrine: Intrinsic Or Extrinsic Fraud, Ralph Anzivino Oct 2015

The Economic Loss Doctrine: Intrinsic Or Extrinsic Fraud, Ralph Anzivino

Marquette Law Review

The economic loss doctrine provides that when a product is sold and results in economic loss for the buyer (no property or personal injury), the buyer’s sole remedy is to sue for breach of contract, not in tort. The two exceptions to the economic loss doctrine are contracts that are predominately for services and contracts where a party is fraudulently induced to enter into the contract.

Fraudulent inducement occurs when one party either fails to disclose a material fact or knowingly misrepresents a significant fact, and thereby induces the other party to enter into a contract. The fraudulent inducement, however, …


Enduring Doctrine: The Collateral Source Rule In Wisconsin Injury Law, Joseph P. Poehlmann Oct 2015

Enduring Doctrine: The Collateral Source Rule In Wisconsin Injury Law, Joseph P. Poehlmann

Marquette Law Review

When the common law collateral source rule first arose in the area of tort law over one hundred years ago, only a minority of individuals maintained health insurance coverage to protect against loss in the event that a negligent actor injured them. Today, however, the vast majority of Americans are covered. Because of this change in the landscape of insurance coverage, many jurisdictions have abrogated or greatly eroded the collateral source rule under the belief that the rule no longer holds a justified role in personal injury litigation. Wisconsin, however, continues to follow the common law form of the rule …


Interim Payments And Economic Damages To Compensate Private-Party Victims Of Hazardous Releases, Julie E. Steiner Apr 2015

Interim Payments And Economic Damages To Compensate Private-Party Victims Of Hazardous Releases, Julie E. Steiner

Marquette Law Review

There is a gap in tort recovery for many hazardous release victims. Hazardous spill victims receive different damage compensation based solely upon the type of hazardous substance released, with oil spill victims benefitting from a number of statutory damage recovery mechanisms that victims of other type of hazardous substance releases do not receive. Specifically, those injured by oil spills receive interim payments and recover for their economic loss. Yet, many victims injured by non-oil hazardous spills will incur economic harm but will not receive compensation because of a prohibition on recovery for economic loss absent accompanying physical injury or private …


The Uneasy And Often Unhelpful Interaction Of Tort Law And Constitutional Law In First Amendment Litigation, George C. Christie Apr 2015

The Uneasy And Often Unhelpful Interaction Of Tort Law And Constitutional Law In First Amendment Litigation, George C. Christie

Marquette Law Review

There are increasing tensions between the First Amendment and the common law torts of intentional infliction of emotional distress, defamation, and privacy. This Article discusses the conflicting interactions among the three models that are competing for primacy as the tort law governing expressive activities evolves to accommodate the requirements of the First Amendment. At one extreme there is the model that expression containing information which has been lawfully obtained that contains neither intentional falsehoods nor incitements to immediate violence can only be sanctioned in narrowly defined exceptional circumstances, even if that expression involves matters that are universally regarded as being …