Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Res ipsa loquitur (2)
- Agency (1)
- Civil damages act (1)
- Control (1)
- Cotributory negligence (1)
-
- Damages (1)
- Divorce (1)
- Domestic peace (1)
- Employer immunity (1)
- Epilepsy (1)
- Evidential inference (1)
- Fellow servant (1)
- Food additives (1)
- Food coloring (1)
- Guilt by association (1)
- Hospital negligence (1)
- Implied warranty (1)
- Inherently dangerous (1)
- Intoxicated person (1)
- Intoxicating liquor (1)
- Judicial policy (1)
- Landowner (1)
- Legislative policy (1)
- Malaya (1)
- Medical evidence (1)
- Medical opinion (1)
- Minor (1)
- Motor vehicle (1)
- Negligence (1)
- Nondelegable duties (1)
Articles 1 - 10 of 10
Full-Text Articles in Law
Food Additives: Legal Recognition Of A Scientific Problem, Robert E. S. Post
Food Additives: Legal Recognition Of A Scientific Problem, Robert E. S. Post
Cleveland State Law Review
Food additives could create one of the nicest legal problems that courts have ever had to face. We are not concerned with theories of negligence, warranty, privity, or statutory interpretation as it applies to any of these three concepts. The real problem is twofold: establishment of harm arising from the presence of an additive or additives; and establishment of a judicial policy to contemplate the fact that, if and when such harm does befall someone, it will happen in spite of the utmost good faith on the part of the manufacturer, and in the face of legislative and administrative authorization …
Some Notes On The Malayan Law Of Negligence, A. E. S. Tay, J. H. M. Heah
Some Notes On The Malayan Law Of Negligence, A. E. S. Tay, J. H. M. Heah
Cleveland State Law Review
In the annals of the spread of the common law to other lands and other ways, Malaya may deserve a modest place, but, as the selection here no doubt shows, so far it has made no significant contribution to the intellectual content of that law. It has neither produced nor harboured a Cardozo or a Dixon. At best, its judges have applied common law principles simply but soundly; they have never, at least in tort, been subtle or illuminating. Its legal history is of interest for its own sake; its legal achievement awaits us in the future, not in the …
Interference With Land Access By Parked Vehicles, Janet Eterovich
Interference With Land Access By Parked Vehicles, Janet Eterovich
Cleveland State Law Review
One of the most important rights of the motorist is his right (some say privilege) to park on the street and highway. This right is very limited, however. It is restricted by the traffic regulations and nuisance statutes enacted and enforced in the various states under their police power to protect the health, safety and general welfare of their citizens. Those most interested in the motorist's right to park are other motorists and landowners whose property abuts on the highways. The rights and remedies of these parties determine the scope of this review.
Res Ipsa Loquitur In Hospital And Malpractice Cases, Julien C. Renswick
Res Ipsa Loquitur In Hospital And Malpractice Cases, Julien C. Renswick
Cleveland State Law Review
Most legal texts state as a matter of law that in order to apply the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur it is required that plaintiff show that the instrumentality causing his injury was in the continuous and exclusive control of one defendant. This general proposition has been stated in Ohio on several occasions. However, in the last few years some exceptions to this general rule have been established in several jurisdictions.
Tort Actions Between Husband And Wife, Catherine H. Hotes
Tort Actions Between Husband And Wife, Catherine H. Hotes
Cleveland State Law Review
In the majority of states, the Married Women's Acts or Emancipation Acts statutes have no express provision with respect to personal tort actions between spouses. Instead, they provide in general language that married women may sue separately for torts committed against them and that they may sue and be sued as though they were unmarried. In most of these states, however, the courts have held that such statutes do not abrogate the common law rule of spousal immunity.
Third Party Actions Against Co-Employees, John E. Martindale
Third Party Actions Against Co-Employees, John E. Martindale
Cleveland State Law Review
Industrial injuries involving intentional torts or situations where the workmen's compensation statute has not been complied with by the employer may, in many cases, relieve the plaintiff of the restrictions placed on his common law rights. It is not our purpose here to explore these exceptions, but to define the extent to which a right of action exists against the coemployee tort-feasor who is clearly within the course and scope of his employment when he inflicts the injury on his fellow worker.
Epilepsy - Post-Traumatic Or Not, Irwin N. Perr
Epilepsy - Post-Traumatic Or Not, Irwin N. Perr
Cleveland State Law Review
This article discusses the legal issues presented in Muscarello v. Peterson. The case presents clearly the medical aspects in ascertaining whether epilepsy is a result of injury or is a result of independent factors. As the court stated, the decision rests basically on medical evidence and its evaluation by the jury.
Labor Union Tort Liability, William J. Hotes
Labor Union Tort Liability, William J. Hotes
Cleveland State Law Review
One of the major problems in determination of labor union tort liability is the extent of federal pre-emption of labor law matters-does it preclude either state legislation or court action where interstate commerce is affected?
Employer Immunity In Independent-Contractor Torts In Ohio, Robert Blattner
Employer Immunity In Independent-Contractor Torts In Ohio, Robert Blattner
Cleveland State Law Review
The independent contractor situation differs from most other tort cases in that the employer usually is not the actual tortfeasor. As the contractor is the one who commits the actual wrong, the employer is liable, if at all, only vicariously. One of the main questions becomes not whether the injured party shall recover, but from whom he shall recover. This is the question examined here.
New Common Law Dramshop Rule, Stephen J. Cahn
New Common Law Dramshop Rule, Stephen J. Cahn
Cleveland State Law Review
The Supreme Court of New Jersey in the recent case of Rappaport v. Nichols' has announced a doctrine of common law liability of tavern keepers very much contra to the existing law as presently understood and applied by the vast majority of the courts of this country. This decision, if indicative of a trend, will serve to impose liability upon tavern keepers where previously it appears that none has existed in the absence of statute.