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

Legal Remedies Commons

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

Articles 1 - 3 of 3

Full-Text Articles in Legal Remedies

The Paradoxes Of Restitution, Mark A. Edwards Jan 2013

The Paradoxes Of Restitution, Mark A. Edwards

Faculty Scholarship

Restitution following mass dispossession is often considered both ideal and impossible. Why? This article identifies two previously unnamed paradoxes that undermine the possibility of restitution.

First, both dispossession and restitution depend on the social construction of rights-worthiness. Over time, people once considered unworthy of property rights ‘become’ worthy of them. However, time also corrodes the practicality and moral weight of restitution claims. By the time the dispossessed ‘become’ worthy of property rights, restitution claims are no longer practically or morally viable. This is the time-unworthiness paradox.

Second, restitution claims are undermined by the concept of collective responsibility. People are sometimes …


The Legacy Of The 9/11 Fund And The Minnesota I-35w Bridge-Collapse Fund: Creating A Template For Compensating Victims Of Future Mass-Tort Catastrophes, Michael K. Steenson Jan 2009

The Legacy Of The 9/11 Fund And The Minnesota I-35w Bridge-Collapse Fund: Creating A Template For Compensating Victims Of Future Mass-Tort Catastrophes, Michael K. Steenson

Faculty Scholarship

The purpose of this article is to analyze and compare the 9/11 Fund and the Minnesota bridge-collapse compensation scheme for purposes of illustrating the necessary components of any future compensation schemes legislatures consider adopting in cases involving other catastrophes. This article first sets out the primary issues that must be addressed when considering a compensation scheme. It then examines the choices made in the 9/11 Fund and Minnesota’s bridge-collapse compensation scheme. A brief comparison of the two compensation schemes follows to provide the framework for considering the components of future compensation schemes.


Minnesota And The American Rule: The Recoverability Of Attorneys’ Fees Following In Re Silicone Implant Insurance Coverage Litigation, John M. Bjorkman Jan 2003

Minnesota And The American Rule: The Recoverability Of Attorneys’ Fees Following In Re Silicone Implant Insurance Coverage Litigation, John M. Bjorkman

William Mitchell Law Review

In the United States, a successful litigant is generally not entitled to recover attorneys' fees from the opposing party absent specific statutory or contractual authorization. This basic principle is commonly referred to as the American Rule. Minnesota recognized and adopted the American Rule roughly 125 years ago. A limited number of exceptions to this longstanding rule exist, but Minnesota courts have generally been reluctant to expand or add to these exceptions. In Minnesota, an exception to the American Rule exists for fees incurred in a declaratory action to establish insurance coverage but only if the insurer has breached its duty …