Law | Open Access Articles | Digital Commons Network™

Should A "Process Defense" Be Recognized In Product Design Cases?, James A. Henderson Jr. Oct 1981

Should A "Process Defense" Be Recognized In Product Design Cases?, James A. Henderson Jr.

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

Professor Henderson, addressing the suggestion that the focus in product design liability cases should be on the process by which design decisions are made rather than on the reasonableness of a particular design, analyzes a proposal that manufacturers be able to present evidence of good process as a defense. Although he applauds the attempt to resolve the difficulties of deciding product design cases, he questions the soundness of the process approach. Specifically, he argues that a process defense would be unworkable because judges would be unable to tell good process from bad, and that the proposal does not address polycentricity--the …

Go to article

In Defense Of Process, Aaron Twerski, Alvin S. Weinstein, William A. Donaher, Henry R. Piehler Oct 1981

In Defense Of Process, Aaron Twerski, Alvin S. Weinstein, William A. Donaher, Henry R. Piehler

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Go to article

Coping With The Time Dimension In Products Liability, James A. Henderson Jr. Jul 1981

Coping With The Time Dimension In Products Liability, James A. Henderson Jr.

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Go to article

Products Liability--An Analysis Of Market Share Liability, David A. Fischer Jan 1981

Products Liability--An Analysis Of Market Share Liability, David A. Fischer

Faculty Publications

In Sindell v. Abbott Laboratories the Supreme Court of California created the market share liability theory of recovery for products liability cases. The innovative Sindell theory, which applies to certain products liability cases in which causation is either questionable or difficult to prove, departed significantly from the traditional tort principles of causation and liability. The theory allows plaintiffs to recover damages for their injuries, but it discounts the defendant's liability by the probability that it did not cause the harm.

Go to article

Truth In Lending 'Simplified': Simplified?, Ralph J. Rohner Jan 1981

Truth In Lending 'Simplified': Simplified?, Ralph J. Rohner

Scholarly Articles

Disclosure of credit terms has been viewed as a primary means of protecting consumers from fraud and deception in credit transactions. To enhance the value of disclosure, Congress enacted the Truth in Lending Simplification and Reform Act of 1980. Professor Rohner analyzes this attempt to simplifij crcdit cost disclosures and finds that the new Act is no more likely to increase consumer protection than the original Truth in Lending Act. The new Act does solve some problems, but does nothing about others and even introduccs further complexities into credit transactions. Among the difficulties left unaddressed by the new Act are …

Go to article

1980 Annual Survey Of Consumer Financial Services Law Developments, Ralph J. Rohner Jan 1981