Torts Commons^™

United States V. Osage Wind, Llc, Summer Carmack

Public Land & Resources Law Review

The Osage Nation, as owner of the beneficial interest in its mineral estate, issues federally-approved leases to persons and entities who wish to conduct mineral development on its lands. After an energy-development company, Osage Wind, leased privately-owned surface lands within Tribal reservation boundaries and began to excavate minerals for purposes of constructing a wind farm, the United States brought suit on the Tribe’s behalf. In the ensuing litigation, the Osage Nation insisted that Osage Wind should have obtained a mineral lease from the Tribe before beginning its work. In its decision, the Tenth Circuit applied one of the Indian law …

Lewis V. Clarke, Summer L. Carmack

Public Land & Resources Law Review

One manner in which Indian tribes exercise their inherent sovereignty is by asserting sovereign immunity. In Lewis v. Clarke, the Court decided that the sovereign immunity extended to instrumentalities of tribes did not further extend to tribal employees acting within the scope of their employment. The Court acknowledged the concerns of the lower court, namely, the possibility of setting a precedent allowing future plaintiffs to sidestep a tribe’s sovereign immunity by suing a tribal employee in his individual capacity. However, the Supreme Court ultimately felt that the immunity of tribal employees should not exceed the immunity extended to state …

Concurrent Liability In Tort And Contract, Yihan Goh, Man Yip

Research Collection Yong Pung How School Of Law

This articleexamines the understanding of concurrent liability in tort and contract,through a detailed analysis of the interplay, intersection and independence of thelaw of torts and the law of contract. The central argument that will beadvanced is that the present understanding of the ‘incident rules’ inconcurrent liability in tort and contract, such as the applicable rules ofremoteness or limitation, is inconsistent with the rationale for concurrencelaid down in Henderson v MerrettSyndicates Ltd. Rather than analyse concurrence as a single situation, thatis, conceiving it as a contest between rules of tort or contract rules, we arguethat the better way forward is to …

Forty-Eight States Are Probably Not Wrong: An Argument For Modernizing Georgia’S Legal Malpractice Statute Of Limitations, Ben Rosichan

Georgia State University Law Review

The legal profession is largely self-regulated, and each state has a bar association charged with creating and enforcing basic standards of professionalism and competence for attorneys. Unfortunately, attorneys do not always adhere to these standards. In Georgia, the State Bar can address attorney misconduct through remedial measures up to and including disbarment. The State Bar cannot, however, compensate wronged clients through monetary damages.Thus, some wronged clients must resort to a lawsuit for legal malpractice where a financial recovery is necessary to make the client whole again.

The statute of limitations for legal malpractice claims should not be so restrictive that …

Reason And Reasonableness: The Necessary Diversity Of The Common Law, Frederic G. Sourgens

Maine Law Review

This Article addresses the central concept of “reasonableness” in the common law and constitutional jurisprudence. On the basis of three examples, the common law of torts, the common law of contracts, and Fourth Amendment jurisprudence, the Article notes that different areas of the law follow fundamentally inconsistent utilitarian, pragmatic, and formalist reasonableness paradigms. The significance of this diversity of reasonableness paradigms remains largely under-theorized. This Article submits that the diversity of reasonableness paradigms is a necessary feature of the common law. It theorizes that the utilitarian, pragmatic and formalistic paradigms are structural elements driving the common law norm-generation process. This …

The Concurrent Liability In Contract And Tort Under U.S. And English Law: To What Extent Plaintiff Is Entitled To Recover For Damages Under Tort Claim?, Phutchaya Numngern

Maurer Theses and Dissertations

Both U.S. and English courts has confronted with the concurrent situations mostly occurring in the cases where 1) the plaintiff asks for the recovery in tort claim despite the existence of contractual relationship or 2) the plaintiff asserts contract claim but the defendant contends that the issue at bar should be sound in tort rather than in contract. After studying all relevant cases and academic writings, this thesis found that both U.S. and English systems generally recognize concurrent tort claim as an elective right. The courts have attempted to provide the justified rationales either to allow the plaintiffs tort claim …

2016 Survey Of Rhode Island Law: Cases And Public Laws Of Note

Roger Williams University Law Review

No abstract provided.

In Defense Of The Restatement Of Liability Insurance Law, Tom Baker, Kyle D. Logue

All Faculty Scholarship

For most non-contractual legal claims for damages that are brought against individuals or firms, there is some form of liability insurance coverage. The Restatement of the Law Liability Insurance is the American Law Institute’s first effort to “restate” the common law governing such liability insurance policies, and we are the reporters. In a recent essay funded by the insurance industry, Yale Law Professor George Priest launched a strident critique of the Restatement project, arguing that the rules adopted in the Restatement:

(a) are radically contrary to existing case law,

(b) have a naïve “pro-policyholder” bias that ignores basic economic insights …

Understanding Insurance Policies As Noncontracts: An Alternative Approach To Drafting And Construing These Unique Financial Instruments, Christopher French

Christopher C. French

Insurance Policies: The Grandparents Of Contractual Black Holes, Christopher French

Christopher C. French