Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Law
Public Nuisance Claims After Conagra, Steven Czak
Public Nuisance Claims After Conagra, Steven Czak
Fordham Law Review
This Note examines the continuing harms of lead-based paint and attempts by cities and states to hold manufacturers and distributors liable for abatement under the public nuisance doctrine. Such suits have stretched traditional conceptions of public nuisance, particularly on the threshold issue of whether pervasive lead paint in residences infringes on a common right held by the public. This Note reviews the major lead paint public nuisance cases from across the country. The plaintiffs were unsuccessful in each case for a variety of reasons until ten California counties prevailed in People v. ConAgra in November 2017. While subsequently reduced by …
Milkovich, #Metoo, And “Liars”: Defamation Law And The Fact-Opinion Distinction, Pooja Bhaskar
Milkovich, #Metoo, And “Liars”: Defamation Law And The Fact-Opinion Distinction, Pooja Bhaskar
Fordham Law Review
Since the start of the #MeToo movement, sexual assault survivors have increasingly turned defamation law against their alleged assaulters. In these #MeToo defamation cases, an alleged victim publicly claims that another person, usually someone of considerable wealth and fame, sexually assaulted them. The alleged assaulter then calls their accuser a liar, causing their accuser to sue their alleged assaulter for defamation. These cases have consistently raised an element of the defamation analysis that has long challenged courts: distinguishing between statements of actionable “fact” and nonactionable “opinion.” #MeToo defamation cases raise the question of whether an alleged assaulter’s claim that their …
It Is Emphatically The Province And Duty Of State Courts To Say What Tort Law Is, Sijin Choi
It Is Emphatically The Province And Duty Of State Courts To Say What Tort Law Is, Sijin Choi
Fordham Law Review
Following the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2011 decision in PLIVA, Inc. v. Mensing, consumers of generic prescription drugs suffering from unwarnedof side effects largely remain without an avenue of legal recourse due to their inability to sue their own manufacturers. But in the pursuit for legal redress, some generic plaintiffs have pursued a narrow window of liability by bringing failure-to-warn claims, sounding in negligence, against the manufacturer responsible for producing the brand-name equivalent of the generic drug. Such claims rest on the rationale that the sui generis federal regulatory scheme governing the prescription drug industry furnishes an inextricable nexus between …