Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
-
- Litigation (33)
- Legal Remedies (30)
- Civil Procedure (18)
- Constitutional Law (16)
- Legislation (15)
-
- Law and Society (13)
- Medical Jurisprudence (12)
- Health Law and Policy (11)
- Courts (10)
- First Amendment (10)
- Comparative and Foreign Law (8)
- Contracts (8)
- Fourteenth Amendment (8)
- Insurance Law (8)
- State and Local Government Law (8)
- Consumer Protection Law (7)
- Jurisdiction (7)
- Business Organizations Law (6)
- Criminal Law (6)
- Jurisprudence (6)
- Civil Law (5)
- International Law (5)
- Law and Economics (5)
- Transportation Law (5)
- Administrative Law (4)
- Bankruptcy Law (4)
- Civil Rights and Discrimination (4)
- Food and Drug Law (4)
- Keyword
-
- Torts (21)
- Products liability (20)
- Asbestos (16)
- Tort (16)
- Damages (14)
-
- Litigation (13)
- Negligence (13)
- California (11)
- Liability (11)
- Insurance (10)
- Injury (8)
- Products Liability (8)
- Remedies (8)
- Plaintiff (7)
- Award (6)
- Contract (6)
- Defendant (6)
- Legislation (6)
- Punitive damages (6)
- Tobacco (6)
- Tort Reform (6)
- Causation (5)
- Civil procedure (5)
- Firearms (5)
- Media (5)
- Punitive Damages (5)
- United States (5)
- Alcoholic beverages (4)
- Bankruptcy (4)
- Children (4)
Articles 1 - 30 of 146
Full-Text Articles in Torts
The "Inherent Powers" Of Multidistrict Litigation Courts, Lynn A. Baker
The "Inherent Powers" Of Multidistrict Litigation Courts, Lynn A. Baker
Pepperdine Law Review
Mass tort multidistrict litigations (MDLs) involving thousands of claims present the judge with unique management issues. The MDL statute, in its scant two pages enacted in 1968, offers no guidance for the proper handling of these issues, and the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure speak to these issues only very generally through Rules 16 and 42. Thus, MDL judges have often invoked their “inherent powers” as authority when they take certain actions with significant implications for the parties and their attorneys. Not surprisingly, several of these actions and their underlying justifications have been controversial: (a) appointing lead attorneys; (b) ordering …
Privileging Opinion, Denigrating Discourse: How The Law Of Defamation Incentivizes News Talk-Show Hyperbole, Clay Calvert
Privileging Opinion, Denigrating Discourse: How The Law Of Defamation Incentivizes News Talk-Show Hyperbole, Clay Calvert
Pepperdine Law Review
This Article examines how defamation law promotes a culture of hyperbole and exaggeration on television news talk shows at the expense of more meaningful dialogue and discourse. The Article uses the 2020 federal court rulings in McDougal v. Fox News Network, LLC and Herring Networks, Inc. v. Maddow as analytical springboards to address this problem. In both cases, judges dismissed defamation claims stemming from comments made by well-known talk-show hosts—Fox News’s Tucker Carlson in McDougal and MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow in Herring Networks—on the ground that their remarks would not be understood by viewers as factual assertions. In concluding that Carlson’s …
Letting The Apes Run The Zoo: Using Tort Law To Provide Animals With A Legal Voice, Tania Rice
Letting The Apes Run The Zoo: Using Tort Law To Provide Animals With A Legal Voice, Tania Rice
Pepperdine Law Review
Science is increasingly showing us that animals have many cognitive similarities with humans. In addition to calls for changes in our animal protection statutes, members of the legal community have begun debating over whether animals, or a certain category of animals, should be granted legal rights. This approach has the potential for drastic societal ramifications. David S. Favre has proposed a tort action for animals as a compromise to the animal rights debate. This Comment explores the different approaches to seeking improved conditions for animals, and proposes an adjusted tort cause of action in response to criticisms of Favre's tort.
Steed V. Imperial Airlines, Clay Plotkin
The Battered Child Syndrome, Jerry A. Ramsey, Byron J. Lawler
The Battered Child Syndrome, Jerry A. Ramsey, Byron J. Lawler
Pepperdine Law Review
No abstract provided.
The Constitutional Infirmity Of The California Government Claim Statute, James C. Downing, Nikolai Tehin Jr.
The Constitutional Infirmity Of The California Government Claim Statute, James C. Downing, Nikolai Tehin Jr.
Pepperdine Law Review
No abstract provided.
Infant Pain And Suffering: The Valuation Dilemma, Peter N. Kalionzes
Infant Pain And Suffering: The Valuation Dilemma, Peter N. Kalionzes
Pepperdine Law Review
No abstract provided.
Remedy For The Intentional Torts Of A Workmen's Compensation Carrier, Everett E. Demler
Remedy For The Intentional Torts Of A Workmen's Compensation Carrier, Everett E. Demler
Pepperdine Law Review
No abstract provided.
Losing The Struggle To Define The Proper Balance Between The Law Of Defamation And The First Amendment - Gertz V. Robert Welch, Inc.: One Step Forward, Two Steps Back, Douglas B. Large, Kristopher Kallman
Losing The Struggle To Define The Proper Balance Between The Law Of Defamation And The First Amendment - Gertz V. Robert Welch, Inc.: One Step Forward, Two Steps Back, Douglas B. Large, Kristopher Kallman
Pepperdine Law Review
No abstract provided.
A Prescription Warning, Carlton Lee Harpst
A Prescription Warning, Carlton Lee Harpst
Pepperdine Law Review
No abstract provided.
The Landlord's Tort Liability For Injuries Caused By Defects Upon The Demised Premises , Michael K. Mckibbin
The Landlord's Tort Liability For Injuries Caused By Defects Upon The Demised Premises , Michael K. Mckibbin
Pepperdine Law Review
No abstract provided.
California's Response For Wrongful Death Of A Stillborn Fetus: Justus V. Atchison, Phyllis A. Dow
California's Response For Wrongful Death Of A Stillborn Fetus: Justus V. Atchison, Phyllis A. Dow
Pepperdine Law Review
No abstract provided.
Comparative Fault And Strict Products Liability: Are They Compatible?, C. R. Hickey
Comparative Fault And Strict Products Liability: Are They Compatible?, C. R. Hickey
Pepperdine Law Review
No abstract provided.
Management's Right To Resort To Injunctive Relief And Self-Help In Order To Prevent Trespassory Union Activity: An Examination Of May Department Stores Co. V. Teamsters Union Local No. 743, Frank J. D'Oro Jr
Pepperdine Law Review
No abstract provided.
Emergence Of The "Tender Years" Doctrine: Too Young To Drink, But Capable Of Escaping The Civil Consequences?, William R. Slomanson
Emergence Of The "Tender Years" Doctrine: Too Young To Drink, But Capable Of Escaping The Civil Consequences?, William R. Slomanson
Pepperdine Law Review
No abstract provided.
Safeway Stores, Inc. V. Nest-Kart: The Culmination Of Li V. Yellow Cab Co., David R. Haglund
Safeway Stores, Inc. V. Nest-Kart: The Culmination Of Li V. Yellow Cab Co., David R. Haglund
Pepperdine Law Review
No abstract provided.
Another Citadel Has Fallen - This Time The Plaintiff's. California Applies Comparative Negligence To Strict Products Liability, Thomas G. Gehring
Another Citadel Has Fallen - This Time The Plaintiff's. California Applies Comparative Negligence To Strict Products Liability, Thomas G. Gehring
Pepperdine Law Review
No abstract provided.
Punitive Damages In Product Liability Cases , Mark P. Robinson Jr., Gerald H.B. Kane Jr.
Punitive Damages In Product Liability Cases , Mark P. Robinson Jr., Gerald H.B. Kane Jr.
Pepperdine Law Review
No abstract provided.
Allocation Of Responsibility After American Motorcycle Association V. Superior Court, Erwin E. Adler
Allocation Of Responsibility After American Motorcycle Association V. Superior Court, Erwin E. Adler
Pepperdine Law Review
In its landmark case of Li v. Yellow Cab Co., the California Supreme Court judicially adopted the doctrine of comparative negligence in an action involving a plaintiff and a single defendant. The court in Li specifically avoided making any decision concerning the numerous issues which would be involved in a multi-party action: the relationship of multiple defendants with one another, the right of one defendant to join others for the purpose of sharing payment of the judgment, the respective responsibilities of such parties for the judgment (including those insolvent, partially solvent or possessing an immunity), and the procedure for the …
Extending The Liability Of Insurers For Bad Faith Acts: Royal Globe Insurance Company V. Superior Court, Michael Tancredi
Extending The Liability Of Insurers For Bad Faith Acts: Royal Globe Insurance Company V. Superior Court, Michael Tancredi
Pepperdine Law Review
No abstract provided.
Truman V. Thomas: The Rise Of Informed Refusal, Thomas M. O'Neil
Truman V. Thomas: The Rise Of Informed Refusal, Thomas M. O'Neil
Pepperdine Law Review
Truman v. Thomas addresses the issue of whether or not a physician must inform a patient of the possible consequences of her refusal to submit to a diagnostic test. The California Supreme Court has determined that a physician has such a duty, and the author provides an examination of this decision and a view of previous case law in the area of informed consent. Although increasing the physician's burden of disclosure, the decision can be seen as a continuation of the trend of cases allowing patients more control over the care of their own bodies.
California Expands Tort Liability Under The Novel Market Share Theory: Sindell V. Abbott Laboratories, N. Denise Taylor
California Expands Tort Liability Under The Novel Market Share Theory: Sindell V. Abbott Laboratories, N. Denise Taylor
Pepperdine Law Review
The California Supreme Court, in the novel and unprecedented case of Sindell v. Abbott Laboratories, eliminated the plaintiffs burden of identification of a negligent party, and thus the causation requirement, in a multiple party tort action. In the course of this decision, the court adopted the "market share" theory of liability which dictated in Sindell that nonidentifiable defendant-manufacturers of the generic drug DES would be liable for the damages in proportion to their share of business in the market. The author thoroughly examines various theories of recovery, such as "alternative liability," "concert of action" and "enterprise liability," which the court …
Molien V. Kaiser Foundation Hospitals: Negligent Infliction Of Emotional Distress, Michael P. Messina
Molien V. Kaiser Foundation Hospitals: Negligent Infliction Of Emotional Distress, Michael P. Messina
Pepperdine Law Review
In Molien v. Kaiser Foundation Hospitals, the California Supreme Court recognized that the interest in freedom from negligent infliction of mental distress is a protectable interest, and that an accompanying physical injury need not exist in order to recover damages. The author presents a discussion of the history and policies behind the right to recover from negligently inflicted emotional distress. The author also discusses and analyzes the court's opinion in Molien and agrees with the court that the fears of opening the floodgate of litigation which before Molien precluded recovery, was arbitrary. Finally, the author concludes that the holding is …
World-Wide Volkswagen Corporation V. Woodson: Minimum Contacts In A Modern World, Craig H. Millet
World-Wide Volkswagen Corporation V. Woodson: Minimum Contacts In A Modern World, Craig H. Millet
Pepperdine Law Review
World Wide Volkswagen Corporation v. Woodson considers the problem of modifying in personam jurisdiction to comply with the changing nature of the American economy. Several lower courts had adjusted the "minimum contacts" test of International Shoe Co. v. Washington to allow for the differences in modern economic lifestyle, but a uniformity amongst the various approaches was lacking. Rather than synthesize a contemporary test for the assertion of in personam jurisdiction, the World- Wide Court chose to place state sovereignty above modern commercial realities and adhere to a more rigid application of the minimum contacts analysis. The author takes issue with …
Police Shootings - Administrative Law As A Method Of Control Over Police: Peterson V. City Of Long Beach, James Wright
Police Shootings - Administrative Law As A Method Of Control Over Police: Peterson V. City Of Long Beach, James Wright
Pepperdine Law Review
Professor Kenneth Davis has long advocated that police manuals should be viewed as interpretative administrative rules, which would guide police in their daily activities. He argued that police departments should not fear adopting interpretative rules because such rules would not be binding; therefore, the department would not be subject to tort liability if an officer violated such a rule. In Peterson v. City of Long Beach, a police officer violated the police manual when he shot and killed a non-violent fleeing suspect. The California Supreme Court, in an opinion by Justice Frank Newman, cited Professor Davis and his call for …
Corporate Homicide: The Stark Realities Of Artificial Beings And Legal Fictions , Douglas S. Anderson
Corporate Homicide: The Stark Realities Of Artificial Beings And Legal Fictions , Douglas S. Anderson
Pepperdine Law Review
In the aftermath of one of the most highly publicized trials in product liability annals-the celebrated Pinto case-the legal question raised by that litigation remains unresolved. Controversy continues as to whether a corporation should be convicted of homicide when it knowingly markets an unsafe product that results in death. Today the answer is a resounding "no", in light of state statutes defining homicide as the killing of one human being by another, difficulties in finding the requisite criminal intent; and the practical problems of placing a legal fiction behind bars. However, there are recent indications that these present obstacles to …
Punitive Damages And The Drunken Driver, William C. Cooper
Punitive Damages And The Drunken Driver, William C. Cooper
Pepperdine Law Review
A discussion of the history and theory of punitive damages which results in advocating their application in a drunk driving context after giving due consideration to the pros and cons of such a sanction. An analysis of case law will reveal the underlying rationale that has motivated certain jurisdictions in applying this severe penal approach in an attempt to deter and curtail the senseless destruction on our nation's highways as well as exploring the impetus behind those other jurisdictions that do not utilize the remedy of punitive damages. The culminating focus is on California's position in this regard. Finally, there …
Aviation Litigation: Federal Preemption And The Creation Of A Federal Remedy As A Means To Extinguish The Current Confusion In The Courts, Deborah J. Olsen
Aviation Litigation: Federal Preemption And The Creation Of A Federal Remedy As A Means To Extinguish The Current Confusion In The Courts, Deborah J. Olsen
Pepperdine Law Review
No abstract provided.
Hubbard V. Boelt: The Fireman's Rule Extended , Marty K. Deniston
Hubbard V. Boelt: The Fireman's Rule Extended , Marty K. Deniston
Pepperdine Law Review
The California Supreme Court, in Hubbard v. Boelt, extended the reach of the fireman's rule to bar a suit brought by a policeman who was injured by the willful and wanton conduct of a speeding motor is while pursuing that motorist. This is an important development in tort law because, traditionally, the fireman's rule had only been applied to bar suits by firemen and policemen who were injured by the negligent conduct of another which was the cause of their presence at the scene. This author suggests that the majority's rationale underlying this extension was flawed because of the fundamental …
The Supreme Court Continues Its Journey Down The Ever Narrowing Paths Of Section 1983 And The Due Process Clause: An Analysis Of Parratt V. Taylor, Robert E. Palmer
The Supreme Court Continues Its Journey Down The Ever Narrowing Paths Of Section 1983 And The Due Process Clause: An Analysis Of Parratt V. Taylor, Robert E. Palmer
Pepperdine Law Review
After nearly a century of quiet slumber, the Supreme Court awoke the sleeping giant. In the past two decades, 42 U.S.C. §1983 has evolved into a judicial Frankenstein monster. Unable to control the beast, the Court has attempted to restrict the creature's movements by unnecessarily limiting its constitutional source. If followed to its logical conclusion, the Court's narrow reading of the Constitution may ultimately demote all due process violations to state tort remedies. This note traces the legislative and judicial evolution of section 1983 as well as the statute's present interaction with the due process clause. The vehicle for this …