Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Social and Behavioral Sciences Commons™
Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
- Keyword
-
- Law and Economics (2)
- Coase theorem (1)
- Drug companies (1)
- Environmental Law (1)
- Essential medicines (1)
-
- Food and Drug Law (1)
- General Law (1)
- Health Law and Policy (1)
- History (1)
- Intellectual Property Law (1)
- Jurisprudence (1)
- Law and Technology (1)
- Law and economics (1)
- Legal History (1)
- Legislation (1)
- Medical Jurisprudence (1)
- Patents (1)
- Pharmaceutical companies (1)
- Politics (1)
- Practice and Procedure (1)
- Prevented rescue (1)
- Products Liability (1)
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Social and Behavioral Sciences
Valuing Mom & Dad: Calculating Loss Of Parental Nurture In A Wrongful Death Action, Andrew J. Laurila
Valuing Mom & Dad: Calculating Loss Of Parental Nurture In A Wrongful Death Action, Andrew J. Laurila
Andrew J. Laurila
No abstract provided.
Rescuing Access To Patented Essential Medicines: Pharmaceutical Companies As Tortfeasors Under The Prevented Rescue Tort Theory, Richard Cameron Gower
Rescuing Access To Patented Essential Medicines: Pharmaceutical Companies As Tortfeasors Under The Prevented Rescue Tort Theory, Richard Cameron Gower
Richard Cameron Gower
Despite some difficulties, state tort law can be argued to create a unique exception to patent law. Specifically, the prevented rescue doctrine suggests that charities and others can circumvent patents on certain critical medications when such actions are necessary to save individuals from death or serious harm. Although this Article finds that the prevented rescue tort doctrines is preempted by federal patent law, all hope is not lost. A federal substantive due process claim may be brought that uses the common law to demonstrate a fundamental right that has long been protected by our Nation’s legal traditions. Moreover, this Article …
Debating Law's Irrelevance: Legal Scholarship And The Coase Theorem In The 1960s, Steven G. Medema
Debating Law's Irrelevance: Legal Scholarship And The Coase Theorem In The 1960s, Steven G. Medema
Steven G Medema
The paper examines the treatment of the Coase theorem by legal scholars during the 1960s. The analysis demonstrates that it was legal scholars, rather than economists, who took the lead in applying Coase's negotiation result in the legal realm and that the early diffusion of Coase's result in the legal literature is anything but a "Chicago" story. We also observe that legal scholars were interesting in examining the applicability of Coase's result across a wide range of legal issues and, in contrast to economists, who were preoccupied with the efficiency predication of Coase's result, tended to focus on Coase's invariance …