Torts Commons^™

Tell Me What You Eat, And I Will Tell Whom To Sue: Big Trouble Ahead For “Big Food"?, Richard C. Ausness

Law Faculty Scholarly Articles

Overweight consumers are seeking damages from purveyors of fast food for obesity-related health problems. Plaintiffs claim that products that are high in fat, sugar, salt and cholesterol are defective. Other potential liability theories include product category liability, failure to warn, failure to disclose nutritional information, deceptive advertising, and negligent marketing. However, in order to prevail at trial, plaintiffs must overcome problems with causation, duty and proximate cause, shifting responsibility, federal preemption, comparative fault, and assumption of risk. If such litigation is successful, it may induce fast-food companies to produce healthier products. Nevertheless, this Article concludes that the problem of obesity, …

Public Tort Litigation: Public Benefit Or Public Nuisance?, Richard C. Ausness

Law Faculty Scholarly Articles

One of the latest developments in products liability law is "public tort" litigation. Public tort or government-sponsored lawsuits are actions by federal, state, or local government entities to recover the cost of public services provided to persons who have been injured as the result of a defendant's alleged misconduct. The best known example is the tobacco litigation of the mid-1990s in which more than forty states brought suit against the leading tobacco companies to recoup the cost of providing health care services to indigent smokers. Eventually, the tobacco companies agreed to pay the states more than $200 billion and also …

Tort Liability For The Sale Of Non-Defective Products: An Analysis And Critique Of The Concept Of Negligent Marketing, Richard C. Ausness

Law Faculty Scholarly Articles

This Article will evaluate the concept of negligent marketing to see whether it ought to become a part of our legal jurisprudence or whether it should be discarded as doctrinally unsound, possibly harmful to important social and economic interests.

Part II of this Article provides an overview of the negligent marketing theory. Negligent marketing can be divided into three categories: (1) product designs that make the product more attractive to criminals; (2) advertising and promotional activities that target inappropriate users; and (3) product distribution practices that facilitate retail sales of dangerous products to vulnerable or unsuitable users. The first category …

Replacing Strict Liability With A Contract-Based Products Liability Regime, Richard C. Ausness

Law Faculty Scholarly Articles

When strict products liability first appeared on the scene some thirty-five years ago, it was heralded as a boon to consumers whose claims to compensation had hitherto been frustrated by the law of sales. Warranty law, it was said, worked fairly well in purely "commercial" transactions, but tort law did a better job in cases where ordinary consumers suffered personal injuries or property damage from defective products. To be sure, defenders of warranty law pointed out that the newly-drafted Uniform Commercial Code (the "Code" or "U.C.C.") was much more consumer friendly than the old Uniform Sales Act. Nevertheless, the proponents …

Learned Intermediaries And Sophisticated Users: Encouraging The Use Of Intermediaries To Transmit Product Safety Information, Richard C. Ausness

Law Faculty Scholarly Articles

The general rule, under both negligence principles and strict products liability, is that a producer or supplier is required to warn users or consumers of its products. In most cases, this duty can be satisfied by placing a warning label on the product itself or by providing safety information in an owner's manual or in other literature attached to or enclosed with the product. However, there are some situations where it is difficult or impracticable to provide a direct warning to the ultimate user or consumer. In such cases, producers and suppliers should be able to satisfy their duty to …

Retribution And Deterrence: The Role Of Punitive Damages In Products Liability Litigation, Richard C. Ausness

Law Faculty Scholarly Articles

Punitive damages constitute an award to an injured party above what is necessary to compensate for actual loss. This Article considers whether punitive damages are an effective means of promoting the goals of products liability law. Section I traces the use of punitive damages in products liability litigation from the early 1960's to the present time. Section II examines the traditional rationales for punitive damages and considers whether they are appropriate in the products liability context. Finally, Section III evaluates some of the measures that commentators have proposed to adapt more fully the concept of punitive damages to products liability …

A Comparative Negligence Checklist To Avoid Future Unnecessary Litigation, John M. Rogers, Randy Donald Shaw

Law Faculty Scholarly Articles

Systems of comparative negligence, whereby the negligence of a plaintiff serves to reduce rather than to preclude tort recovery in negligence, have been adopted in thirty-nine states. The common law rule that contributory negligence is an absolute bar to recovery is still the law in Kentucky, although modified by the doctrine of "last clear chance." Kentucky may soon join the trend toward comparative negligence, however. In the last legislative session, bills to adopt comparative negligence were introduced in both the House of Representatives and the Senate. A hearing on this subject was held by the Interim Judiciary and Civil Procedure …

Kentucky Law Survey: Torts, Richard C. Ausness

Law Faculty Scholarly Articles

This issue of the Survey of Kentucky tort law includes recent decisions on false imprisonment, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and products liability. The first case, Consolidated Sales Co. v. Malone, held that Kentucky's shoplifter detention statute authorized a personal search of suspected shoplifters by store personnel. In the second case, Eigelbach v. Watts, the Kentucky Supreme Court adhered to its longstanding rule that physical impact was essential to an action for intentional infliction of emotional distress. Finally, in the third decision, McMichael v. American Red Cross, the Court, utilizing the Restatement's “unavoidably unsafe” rationale, refused to impose …

Kentucky Law Survey: Torts, Richard C. Ausness

Law Faculty Scholarly Articles

This article provides a survey of Kentucky legal developments in the area of tort law. The topics covered in this discussion include: negligence per se, res ipsa loquitur, the legal duty of a land owner, parental liability for the acts of children, the last clear chance doctrine, products liability, private nuisance, and public nuisance.