Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Law
Joint And Several Liability In Minnesota: The 2003 Model, Michael K. Steenson
Joint And Several Liability In Minnesota: The 2003 Model, Michael K. Steenson
Faculty Scholarship
The 2003 amendment to Minnesota’s Comparative Act can be assessed in various ways. Whether it will have the economic impact its proponents suggest it will have is a question that is not susceptible of a ready answer now, or perhaps in the immediate future. From a fairness standpoint, any assessment of the amendment has to take into consideration the full reach of the Comparative Fault Act. It is important to understand that on balance the Act works to the disadvantage of the plaintiff in a variety of ways. The plaintiff cannot recover if the plaintiff’s fault is greater than the …
Keeping The Pierringer Promise: Fair Settlements And Fair Trials, Peter B. Knapp
Keeping The Pierringer Promise: Fair Settlements And Fair Trials, Peter B. Knapp
Faculty Scholarship
This article explores why Perringer releases have failed to promise fairness to the nonsettling defendant. For over thirty years, Pierringer releases have been part of the ebb and flow of civil litigation. In 1978, the Minnesota Supreme Court officially approved the use of Pierringer releases in Minnesota. When first adopted, the release seemed to promise something for everyone. The Pierringer release even offered a promise of fairness to the nonsettling defendant: Be assured that, no matter what the outcome of trial, you will pay no more than your “fair share” of the verdict. Unfortunately, however, largely because of the impact …
The Anatomy Of Products Liability In Minnesota: Principles Of Loss Allocation, Michael K. Steenson
The Anatomy Of Products Liability In Minnesota: Principles Of Loss Allocation, Michael K. Steenson
Faculty Scholarship
In this article, Professor Steenson continues the discussion that began in The Anatomy of Products Liability in Minnesota: The Theories of Recovery, appearing in the last Issue of the William Mitchell Law Review, by shifting the analytical focus to the problems involved in allocating awards among the parties in Minnesota products liability cases. Professor Steenson analyzes defenses, contribution and indemnity, and the impact of Minnesota's comparative fault act on products liability law.