Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- 92 McGreevy v. Racal-Dana InstrumentsHaigh v. Matsushita Electric Corp. of America (1)
- Big Jack Overall Co. v. Bray (1)
- Bonbrest v. Kotz (1)
- Britt v. Sears (1)
- Death by Wrongful Act Statute (1)
-
- Dietrich v. Northampton (1)
- Featherall v. Firestone (1)
- Greenman v. Yuba Power Products (1)
- Haddon v. Metropolitan Life Insurance Co (1)
- Haigh v. Matsushita Electric Corp. of America (1)
- Joyce v. A.C. and S. (1)
- Kalafut v. Gruver (1)
- Lawrence v. Craven Tire Co (1)
- Lawrence v. Craven Tire Co. (1)
- Marshall v. H.K. Ferguson Co (1)
- McGreevy v. Racal-Dana Instruments (1)
- Modaber v. Kelly (1)
- Presley v. Newport Hospital (1)
- Reamer v. National Service Industries (1)
- Twentieth Century America (1)
- Verkennes v. Corniea (1)
- Willis v. Raymark Indus (1)
- Workers' Compensation Act (1)
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Torts
Recovery For The Wrongful Death Of A Fetus, Michael P. Mccready
Recovery For The Wrongful Death Of A Fetus, Michael P. Mccready
University of Richmond Law Review
This Note traces the history and development of actions for prenatal wrongful death. It emphasizes the state of the law in Virginia and examines the rationale of various jurisdictions where courts have chosen to draw a line for imposing liability. After discussing the role of wrongful death statutes, this Note concludes with an analysis of the trends in the law and a prediction of the direction the law will take in the future.
Virginia Law Of Products Liability, Thomas W. Williamson Jr.
Virginia Law Of Products Liability, Thomas W. Williamson Jr.
University of Richmond Law Review
When the history of Twentieth Century America's jurisprudence is chronicled, a prominent chapter will be devoted to the rise of product liability law. At the beginning of the century, a person injured by a defective product usually had no recourse against either the product's seller or manufacturer. By 1970, the barriers obstructing recovery had been dismantled and it was generally accepted that a seller or manufacturer of a product would be strictly liable to anyone injured by the defective condition of the product.
Employer Intentional Torts In Virginia: Proposal For An Exception To The Exclusive Workers' Compensation Remedy, Jodi Parrish Power
Employer Intentional Torts In Virginia: Proposal For An Exception To The Exclusive Workers' Compensation Remedy, Jodi Parrish Power
University of Richmond Law Review
Workers' compensation is a no-fault system of recovery implemented by statute in every state. Originating in the nature of a compromise, the workers' compensation system is the exclusive remedy between the employee and employer. The majority of states, however, recognize an exception to this exclusivity provision where an employer's actions constitute an intentional tort. Virginia has yet to recognize such an exception by statute or judicial action.