Torts Commons^™

Let The Jury Decide! A Plea For The Proper Allocation Of Decision-Making Authority In Louisiana Negligence Cases, Thomas C. Galligan Jr.

Journal Articles

No abstract provided.

Covid-19 Business Interruption Insurance Losses: The Cases For And Against Coverage, Christopher French

Journal Articles

The financial consequences of the government-ordered shutdowns of businesses across America to mitigate the COVID-19 health crisis are enormous. Estimates indicate that small businesses have lost $255 to $431 billion per month and more than 44 million workers have been laid off. When businesses have requested reimbursement of their business interruption losses from their insurers under business interruption policies, their insurers have denied the claims. The insurance industry also has announced that business interruption policies do not cover pandemic losses, so they intend to fight COVID-19 claims “tooth and nail.” More than 450 lawsuits throughout the country already have been …

Res Ipsa Loquitur: Reducing Confusion Of Creating Bias?, John E. Lopatka, Jeffrey Kahn

Journal Articles

The so-called doctrine of res ipsa loquitur has been a mystery since its birth more than a century ago. This Article helps solve the mystery. In practical effect, res ipsa loquirtur, though usually thought of as a tort doctrine, functions as a rule of trial practice that allows jurors to rely on circumstantial evidence surrounding an accident to find the defendant liable. Standard jury instructions in negligence cases, however, fail to inform jurors that they are permitted to rely upon circumstantial evidence in reaching a verdict. Why, then, is another, more specific circumstantial evidence charge necessary or desirable?

We …

Damages For Privileged Harms, Stephen Yelderman

Journal Articles

The law often permits substantial harms without liability. Once liability is triggered, compensatory damages require a defendant to pay for the harm caused by his wrongful conduct. But there is significant theoretical and doctrinal ambiguity in how compensatory damages should account for the harm that the defendant could have caused without incurring liability in the first place. These harms are “privileged,” in the sense that the defendant would have been free to impose them in a counterfactual universe in which he complied with the substantive law. Having transgressed that law, he is now responsible for damages, but the question is …