Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 4 of 4
Full-Text Articles in Law
When Should The Trier Of Fact Determine The Validity Of Personal Injury Releases?—Bennett V. Shinoda Floral, Inc., 108 Wash. 2d 386, 739 P.2d 648 (1987), Robert A. Radcliffe
When Should The Trier Of Fact Determine The Validity Of Personal Injury Releases?—Bennett V. Shinoda Floral, Inc., 108 Wash. 2d 386, 739 P.2d 648 (1987), Robert A. Radcliffe
Washington Law Review
In Bennett v. Shinoda Floral, Inc., the Washington Supreme Court departed from a national trend toward flexibility in permitting avoidance of personal injury releases. The plaintiffs in Bennett had signed releases of all claims, known and unknown. The plaintiffs were unaware of the extent or consequences of their injuries, but they had signed knowing that the injuries were not yet healed. The court held that the releases were binding because the plaintiffs had assumed the risk of any unforeseen consequences. The Bennett opinion followed two lines of analysis. First, the court held that the validity of a release is …
When Should The Trier Of Fact Determine The Validity Of Personal Injury Releases?—Bennett V. Shinoda Floral, Inc., 108 Wash. 2d 386, 739 P.2d 648 (1987), Robert A. Radcliffe
When Should The Trier Of Fact Determine The Validity Of Personal Injury Releases?—Bennett V. Shinoda Floral, Inc., 108 Wash. 2d 386, 739 P.2d 648 (1987), Robert A. Radcliffe
Washington Law Review
In Bennett v. Shinoda Floral, Inc., the Washington Supreme Court departed from a national trend toward flexibility in permitting avoidance of personal injury releases. The plaintiffs in Bennett had signed releases of all claims, known and unknown. The plaintiffs were unaware of the extent or consequences of their injuries, but they had signed knowing that the injuries were not yet healed. The court held that the releases were binding because the plaintiffs had assumed the risk of any unforeseen consequences. The Bennett opinion followed two lines of analysis. First, the court held that the validity of a release is an …
The National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act Of 1986: A Solution To The Vaccine Liability Crisis?, Mary Beth Neraas
The National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act Of 1986: A Solution To The Vaccine Liability Crisis?, Mary Beth Neraas
Washington Law Review
This Comment addresses the role of the tort system in the vaccine liability crisis and analyzes the probable success of the Act in resolving the crisis. This Comment recommends that the Act be amended to prohibit all actions against vaccine manufacturers based on failure to warn theories. Even though failure to warn is not a proper basis for finding civil liability, this Comment suggests that the Food and Drug Administration establish guidelines, enforceable under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, to require that each vaccinee receives an adequate warning of the risks associated with vaccination.
The National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act Of 1986: A Solution To The Vaccine Liability Crisis?, Mary Beth Neraas
The National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act Of 1986: A Solution To The Vaccine Liability Crisis?, Mary Beth Neraas
Washington Law Review
This Comment addresses the role of the tort system in the vaccine liability crisis and analyzes the probable success of the Act in resolving the crisis. This Comment recommends that the Act be amended to prohibit all actions against vaccine manufacturers based on failure to warn theories. Even though failure to warn is not a proper basis for finding civil liability, this Comment suggests that the Food and Drug Administration establish guidelines, enforceable under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, to require that each vaccinee receives an adequate warning of the risks associated with vaccination.