Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Torts Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

5431 Full-Text Articles 3533 Authors 2314391 Downloads 119 Institutions

All Articles in Torts

Faceted Search

5431 full-text articles. Page 1 of 93.

Deep Pocket Jurisprudence: Where Tort Law Should Draw The Line, Victor E. Schwartz, Phil Goldberg, Christopher E. Appel 2018 University of Oklahoma College of Law

Deep Pocket Jurisprudence: Where Tort Law Should Draw The Line, Victor E. Schwartz, Phil Goldberg, Christopher E. Appel

Oklahoma Law Review

No abstract provided.


Church Liability For Clergy Sexual Abuse: Have Time And Events Overthrown Swanson V. Roman Catholic Bishop Of Portland?, Sonia J. Buck 2017 University of Maine School of Law

Church Liability For Clergy Sexual Abuse: Have Time And Events Overthrown Swanson V. Roman Catholic Bishop Of Portland?, Sonia J. Buck

Maine Law Review

In Swanson v. Roman Catholic Bishop of Portland, Albert and Ruth Swanson sued their former pastor, Father Maurice Morin, after the couple's marriage counseling sessions with Father Morin led to a sexual relationship between Father Morin and Mrs. Swanson. The Swansons brought claims against Father Morin for negligent and intentional infliction of emotional distress and negligent pastoral counseling. They also sued the Roman Catholic Bishop of Portland, a corporation, and Bishop Joseph Gerry in his personal capacity (collectively referred to as the “Church”) for negligence in selecting, training, and supervising Father Morin. The Maine Superior Court dismissed the claims ...


Negligence Per Se Theories In Pharmaceutical & Medical Device Litigation, Andrew E. Costa 2017 University of Maine School of Law

Negligence Per Se Theories In Pharmaceutical & Medical Device Litigation, Andrew E. Costa

Maine Law Review

The notion of addressing the vagaries of negligence per se theories in the context of pharmaceutical and medical device litigation seems to promise little more than a monograph anesthetized by a body of obscure pharmaceutical and medical device provisions viewed through the lenses of various states' negligence law. Maybe little more than that can be assured. However, the issue of how courts should address negligence per se theories in this context implicates a variety of “larger” (or, possibly, more interesting) legal issues in general and pharmaceutical and medical device litigation in particular. Perhaps foremost among these issues is the interaction ...


Symborski V. Spring Mtn. Treatment Ctr., 133 Nev. Adv. Op. 80 (Oct. 26, 2017), Paloma Guerrero 2017 University of Nevada, Las Vegas -- William S. Boyd School of Law

Symborski V. Spring Mtn. Treatment Ctr., 133 Nev. Adv. Op. 80 (Oct. 26, 2017), Paloma Guerrero

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The Court determined medical malpractice, and subsequent adherence to NRS 41A.071, involves a medical diagnosis, treatment, or judgment, and when the standards of care pertaining to the medical issue require explanation to the jury from a medical expert at trial. Therefore, Szymborski’s claims for negligence, malpractice, gross negligence, negligence per se, and negligent hiring, training, and supervision state claims for relief which were not based on a medical treatment or judgment and should not have been dismissed for failure to attach the NRS 41A.071 affidavit.


Clark Cty. Sch. Dist. V. Payo, 133 Nev. Adv. Op. 79 (Oct. 26, 2017), Alma Orozco 2017 University of Nevada, Las Vegas -- William S. Boyd School of Law

Clark Cty. Sch. Dist. V. Payo, 133 Nev. Adv. Op. 79 (Oct. 26, 2017), Alma Orozco

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

Implied assumption of the risk does not apply when a student is required to participate in a physical education class because the doctrine’s “voluntariness” element is not satisfied. Discretionary-function immunity does not apply when cases allege inadequate supervision or instruction because such decisions, while discretionary, are not policy-based, as the discretionary-immunity test requires. Decisions are not entitled to discretionary-function immunity unless they entail governmental planning or policy formulation, which involves economic, social, and political considerations.


Unconstitutional Asymmetry Or A Rational Basis For Inconsistency? The Admissibility Of Medical Malpractice Prelitigation Screening Panel Findings Before And After Smith V. Hawthorne I And Ii, Matthew Asnault Morris 2017 University of Maine School of Law

Unconstitutional Asymmetry Or A Rational Basis For Inconsistency? The Admissibility Of Medical Malpractice Prelitigation Screening Panel Findings Before And After Smith V. Hawthorne I And Ii, Matthew Asnault Morris

Maine Law Review

Pre-litigation screening panels have been instrumental in streamlining medical malpractice litigation in the State of Maine by culling claims from superior court dockets, encouraging settlements, and providing findings of fact that could prove useful for a jury if the case proceeds to trial. In enacting one particular provision governing the confidentiality and the admissibility of the screening panel process, however, the legislature may have sacrificed the constitutional rights of medical malpractice claimants in favor of a lighter docket. Two recent cases before the Law Court, Smith I and II, have challenged the constitutionality of Maine’s unique statutory approach to ...


Rewriting Hockey's Unwritten Rules: Moore V. Bertuzzi, Patrick K. Thornton 2017 University of Maine School of Law

Rewriting Hockey's Unwritten Rules: Moore V. Bertuzzi, Patrick K. Thornton

Maine Law Review

The word “enforcer” or “hockey goon” does not appear in the 2007–2008 National Hockey League (NHL) rulebook. However, every player and coach knows the meaning of those words. Hockey has always had its share of enforcers or “goons” that have protected star players. Steve Moore, former Harvard captain, and his parents have sued NHL tough-man Todd Bertuzzi, the Vancouver Canucks, and the partnership that owned the Canucks for an on-ice incident that occurred between Moore and Bertuzzi on March 8, 2004. Dedicated hockey fans have followed the lawsuit, but with the “incident” now over four years old many have ...


The Unappreciated Importance, For Small Business Defendants, Of The Duty To Settle, Robert Heidt 2017 University of Maine School of Law

The Unappreciated Importance, For Small Business Defendants, Of The Duty To Settle, Robert Heidt

Maine Law Review

This paper suggests how the duty to settle, which requires liability insurers to pay damages awarded against their insured in excess of the policy limits when the insurers reject a reasonable settlement offer within the limits, may have indirectly led certain of their insureds--small business recreational vendors like horse riding stables or some motels offering swimming pools with diving boards--to sanitize the recreational activities they offer. More generally, the duty to settle's effect on the lawsuits injured customers brought against small business recreational vendors may have led a wide variety of such vendors to sanitize activities the vendors previously ...


A Strange Distinction: Charitable Immunity And Clergy Sexual Abuse In Picher V. Roman Catholic Bishop Of Portland, Matthew Cobb 2017 University of Maine School of Law

A Strange Distinction: Charitable Immunity And Clergy Sexual Abuse In Picher V. Roman Catholic Bishop Of Portland, Matthew Cobb

Maine Law Review

In 2009, the Maine Supreme Judicial Court, sitting as the Law Court, decided Picher v. Roman Catholic Bishop of Portland, a case that presented an issue of first impression in Maine: whether the doctrine of charitable immunity protected charitable organizations from liability for intentional torts. The court ultimately held that charitable immunity was not a defense to intentional torts, but that it did bar negligence claims based on the sexual abuse of a minor. In Picher, a majority of the Law Court partly vacated the trial court’s grant of summary judgment for the Roman Catholic Bishop of Portland (Bishop ...


Has Addy V. Jenkins, Inc. Heightened The Standard For Establishing A Reasonable Inference Of Proximate Cause In Maine?, Denitsa N. Pocheva-Smith 2017 University of Maine School of Law

Has Addy V. Jenkins, Inc. Heightened The Standard For Establishing A Reasonable Inference Of Proximate Cause In Maine?, Denitsa N. Pocheva-Smith

Maine Law Review

Suppose the following: A subcontractor is hired by a construction company to dry-wall the outside of a building. The general contractor provides and erects a three-story staging to assist the subcontractor during that process. The staging is installed before the subcontractor is scheduled to start work, but does not contain safety equipment, such as rails, platforms, or ladders, and is not tied to the building. The subcontractor begins work on the building on Monday. On that same day, he falls while ascending the staging. He reports the fall to the general contractor and asks that safety equipment be installed on ...


"The Wrong Approach At The Wrong Time?": Maine Adopts Strict Liability For Abnormally Dangerous Activities In Dyer V. Maine Drilling And Blasting, Inc., Matthew M. Cobb 2017 University of Maine School of Law

"The Wrong Approach At The Wrong Time?": Maine Adopts Strict Liability For Abnormally Dangerous Activities In Dyer V. Maine Drilling And Blasting, Inc., Matthew M. Cobb

Maine Law Review

In 2009, the Maine Supreme Judicial Court, sitting as the Law Court, held in Dyer v. Maine Drilling and Blasting, Inc. that strict liability should be applied to abnormally dangerous activities in accordance with the Restatement (Second) of Torts §§ 519-20. In doing so, the court expressly overruled its decision in Reynolds v. W.H. Hinman Co., which had rejected a strict liability approach to blasting cases in favor of a negligence-based standard. In Dyer, a majority of the Law Court vacated the trial court’s grant of summary judgment for Maine Drilling and Blasting, Inc. (Maine Drilling) and held that ...


Constitution Day Lecture: Constitutional Law And Tort Law: Injury, Race, Gender, And Equal Protection, Jennifer B. Wriggins 2017 University of Maine School of Law

Constitution Day Lecture: Constitutional Law And Tort Law: Injury, Race, Gender, And Equal Protection, Jennifer B. Wriggins

Maine Law Review

The focus of today’s annual Constitution Day lecture at the University of Maine School of Law is on the Fourteenth Amendment and specifically how the Equal Protection Clause relates to tort law. First, I will talk about the Equal Protection Clause in general—what it says, and some of what it has been held to mean—particularly where government makes distinctions based on race and gender. Second, I will discuss two historical tort cases that violate equal protection on the basis of race. In doing so, I uncover the racial history of tort law that has been hidden in ...


Access To Prescription Drugs: A Normative Economic Approach To Pharmacist Conscience Clause Legislation, Joanna K. Sax 2017 University of Maine School of Law

Access To Prescription Drugs: A Normative Economic Approach To Pharmacist Conscience Clause Legislation, Joanna K. Sax

Maine Law Review

Over the past several years, many states introduced legislation that protects a pharmacist’s decision to refuse to fill a prescription. Termed “conscience clauses,” these pieces of legislation allow a pharmacist to refuse to fill a prescription because of moral or religious objections without fear of legal repercussions. In 2006, for example, twenty-one states considered legislation that permits pharmacists to refuse to fill prescriptions; some bills focus on contraception alone, while others are not specific to any one type of medication. Arkansas, Mississippi, Georgia, Florida, and South Dakota have state laws that provide legal protection to pharmacists who refuse to ...


Estate Of Fortier V. City Of Lewiston: Is Maine's Tort Claims Act Unintelligible?, William I. Olver 2017 University of Maine School of Law

Estate Of Fortier V. City Of Lewiston: Is Maine's Tort Claims Act Unintelligible?, William I. Olver

Maine Law Review

In Estate of Fortier v. City of Lewiston, the Maine Supreme Judicial Court, sitting as the Law Court, was asked to decide if the City of Lewiston was “using” an aircraft under the Maine Tort Claims Act (MTCA) when it chartered a plane from Twin Cities Air Services (Twin Cities) as part of an Air Force Junior Reserve Officer Training Corp (AFJROTC) exercise. Tragically, the pilot and three AFJROTC cadets from Lewiston High School lost their lives when the plane crashed into Barker Mountain shortly after take-off. The families of the students brought suit against Lewiston, in part, alleging negligence ...


Humphries V. New York-New York Hotel & Casino, 133 Nev. Adv. Op. 77 (Oct. 5, 2017), Emily Meibert 2017 University of Nevada, Las Vegas -- William S. Boyd School of Law

Humphries V. New York-New York Hotel & Casino, 133 Nev. Adv. Op. 77 (Oct. 5, 2017), Emily Meibert

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

An innkeeper is liable under NRS 651.015 if an injured patron can show that they suffered foreseeable harm; foreseeability is established when the innkeeper fails to exercise due care for the safety of its patrons or if the innkeeper had notice or knowledge of prior incidents of similar acts on the premises. Notice or knowledge of prior incidents of similar acts is a case-by-case analysis, and requires the district court consider similar wrongful acts in terms of the location of the attack, level of violence, and implicated security concerns.


Tipping The Scales?: Maine Adopts The Continuing Negligent Treatment Doctrine In Baker V. Farrand, Michael P. Beers 2017 University of Maine School of Law

Tipping The Scales?: Maine Adopts The Continuing Negligent Treatment Doctrine In Baker V. Farrand, Michael P. Beers

Maine Law Review

In Baker v. Farrand, the Maine Supreme Judicial Court, sitting as the Law Court, held that for a series of related negligent acts or omissions committed by a health care provider or practitioner, a single cause of action “accrues” under the Maine Health Security Act (hereinafter MHSA) on the date of the last act or omission that contributed to the plaintiff’s injury. Hence, in situations where a physician provides continuing negligent treatment to a patient in which each and every one of the physician’s actions are negligent, the MHSA’s three-year statute of limitations does not begin to ...


Your Bodies, Ourselves: Legal Protection Of Potential Human Life, Jeffery A. Parness 2017 St. John's University School of Law

Your Bodies, Ourselves: Legal Protection Of Potential Human Life, Jeffery A. Parness

The Catholic Lawyer

No abstract provided.


Ford Motor Co. V. Trejo, 133 Nev. Adv. Op. 68 (Sept. 27, 2017), Jeff Chronister 2017 University of Nevada, Las Vegas -- William S. Boyd School of Law

Ford Motor Co. V. Trejo, 133 Nev. Adv. Op. 68 (Sept. 27, 2017), Jeff Chronister

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The Court declined to adopt the risk-utility analysis. The consumer-expectation test is the appropriate standard for strict products liability claims in Nevada, and the risk-utility analysis is inappropriate because it inserts aspects of negligence into the test and unfairly burdens plaintiffs.


Lmao; That Guy Is Such A &*%#!: Redefining Defamation Law's Stagnant Community Standard In A Rapidly Changing World, Daniel Lewis 2017 Selected Works

Lmao; That Guy Is Such A &*%#!: Redefining Defamation Law's Stagnant Community Standard In A Rapidly Changing World, Daniel Lewis

Daniel Lewis

Nearly forty years ago in the heat of the civil rights movement, the Supreme Court famously considered whether a Montgomery, Alabama Commissioner who supervised the Police Department was damaged by defamatory comments. In determining whether the false statements published in the New York Times article lowered the Commissioner's reputation and impeded his reelection chances, the court wrestled with defining the community in which these comments were published. Should the Supreme Court consider the allegedly defamatory comments within the scope of a national community, as the New York Times is a national publication, or was the correct community restrained to ...


Contingent Fee Litigation In New York City, Eric Helland, Daniel M. Klerman, Brenda Dowling, Alexander Kappner 2017 Claremont McKenna College

Contingent Fee Litigation In New York City, Eric Helland, Daniel M. Klerman, Brenda Dowling, Alexander Kappner

University of Southern California Legal Studies Working Paper Series

Since 1957, New York courts have required contingent fee lawyers to file “closing statements” that disclose settlement amounts, lawyers’ fees, an accounting of expenses, and other information. This article provides preliminary analysis of these data for the period 2004-2013. Among this article’s findings are that settlement rates in New York state courts are very high (84%) relative to previous studies, that very few cases are resolved by dispositive motions, that litigated cases and settled cases have almost exactly the same average recovery, that median litigation expenses, other than attorney’s fees, are 3% of gross recovery, that claims are ...


Digital Commons powered by bepress