Torts Commons^™

The Choice Between Implied Warranty And Tort Liability For Recovery Of Pure Economic Loss In "Contract-Torts": A Comparison Of Judicial And Private Ordering In The Real Property Market, Norman Siebrasse

Dalhousie Law Journal

The Supreme Court's decision in Winnipeg Condo. Corp. No. 36 v. Bird Construction expanded recovery for pure economic loss in tort by allowing a subsequent purchaser to recover the cost of repairing a dangerous defect arising out of negligence in the construction of a building. This article outlines the theoretical justifications for extended tort liability when the parties are linked by a contractual chain but are not in privity, and concludes that it is not possible to determine whether extended liability is desirable without considering the details of the market in question. A comparison between tort liability and the protection …

The Supreme Court And Our Culture Of Irresponsibility, Mary J. Davis

Law Faculty Scholarly Articles

This article chronicles the Supreme Court's expansion of the “culture of irresponsibility,” where institutional defendants are freed from tort liability with no check on the abuse of such immunity. Professor Davis describes the Court's progression toward immunity in products liability decisions of the past decade including East River Steamship, Boyle, Cipollone, and Lohr. Noting the effect of the Court's decisions in promoting institutional irresponsibility, Professor Davis encourages the Court to use its “cultural influence” and reconsider its broad extension of immunity which has spread to situations and institutional defendants the Court never imagined.

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 …

Liability For Unreasonably And Unavoidably Unsafe Products: Does Negligence Doctrine Have A Role To Play, Joseph A. Page

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

To what extent, if any, should courts hold defendants liable for harm caused by hazards associated with the unduly and unavoidably dangerous aspects of goods they produce and market?

Where manufacturers might have eliminated unreasonable risks arising from the manufacture or design of a product, or from the information (or lack thereof) conveyed by a product's labeling, the tort system traditionally has provided injured victims with an opportunity to obtain compensation for injuries attributable to these risks. Moreover, even where risks from manufacturing or construction defects could not have been eliminated with the exercise of reasonable care, the courts have …