Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 7 of 7
Full-Text Articles in Law
Tort Liability For Psychiatric Damage, Mitchell Mcinnes
Tort Liability For Psychiatric Damage, Mitchell Mcinnes
Dalhousie Law Journal
One of tort law's great failures is its treatment of claims for psychiatric damage (or, to use a misleading but more popular term, nervous shock'). While a great deal of progress has been made since the days when liability would lie only if a plaintiff also suffered physical injury', or at least reasonably feared for her personal safety3 , the law remains largely unsatisfactory and in need of reform. Illogical and arbitrary rules abound with the result that worthy claimants are often denied compensation. Recent attempts at clarification and rationalization by the House of Lords4 and the High Court of …
Enterprise Responsibility For Personal Injury: Further Reflections, Kenneth S. Abraham, Robert L. Rabin, Paul C. Weiler
Enterprise Responsibility For Personal Injury: Further Reflections, Kenneth S. Abraham, Robert L. Rabin, Paul C. Weiler
San Diego Law Review
This Article, written by three contributors to the Reporters' Study on Enterprise Responsibility for Personal Injury, offers further reflections about specific areas and proposals in the Study that have evoked important questions and comments. It addresses the concern that there are too many lawyers and lawsuits in the United States, and that it is this overpopulation of lawyers that is causing excessive tort litigation. It also addresses high damage awards and insurance premiums, it recommends refining products liability, and recommends organizational responsibility for medical malpractice. This Article is a supplement to the Study, and offers further examination of important issues …
Who Pays In The End For Injury Compensation - Reflections On Wealth Transfers From The Innocent, Alfred F. Conard
Who Pays In The End For Injury Compensation - Reflections On Wealth Transfers From The Innocent, Alfred F. Conard
San Diego Law Review
This Article recognizes that the people who actually pay for tort judgments are generally not the wrongdoers, but the enterprises that have employed or insured the tortfeasors, or purveyed the faulty products. The enterprises then recover their expenditures by charging higher prices to their consumers, or by reducing the benefits that they confer on investors, workers, and the general public. The consumers, the workers, the public, and the investors are the innocent human beings who contribute to paying for tort judgments. This Article addresses what kinds of losses justify forcing the innocent to contribute, and suggests reforms that seem to …
A Lost Opportunity: A Review Of The American Law Institute's Reporters' Study On Enterprise Responsibility For Personal Injury, Jeffrey O'Connell, Chad M. Oldfather
A Lost Opportunity: A Review Of The American Law Institute's Reporters' Study On Enterprise Responsibility For Personal Injury, Jeffrey O'Connell, Chad M. Oldfather
San Diego Law Review
This is a critical analysis of the Reporters' Study on Enterprise Responsibility for Personal Injury. Although recognizing that the Study is comprehensive and well researched, the authors express disappointment at the lack of vision contained in the Study. They find that the authors of the Study failed to find their way out of the maze of the tort system, and in exploring so many nooks and crannies they become lost in the details, rather than looking at the big picture. The authors of this Article provide a brief overview of the Study, and proceed with analysis. They conclude that the …
Comments On The Reporters' Study Of Enterprise Responsibility For Personal Injury, Jerry J. Phillips
Comments On The Reporters' Study Of Enterprise Responsibility For Personal Injury, Jerry J. Phillips
San Diego Law Review
This Article critiques the substantive law and damage proposals of the Reporters' Study on Enterprise Liability, which was published in 1991 by the American Law Institute. Contrary to the Reporters' recommendations, the author proposes retaining the consumer expectations test and strict liability for product suppliers. He argues that it is not practical to shift medical malpractice liability, as proposed by the Study, from doctors to hospitals. In the area of damages, the author proposes retaining the rules of recovery for pain and suffering, punitive damages, and the collateral source rules essentially as they are now, instead of adopting the changes …
The American Law Institute's Reporters' Study On Enterprise Responsibility For Personal Injury: A Timely Call For Punitive Damages Reform, Victor E. Schwarz, Mark A. Behrens
The American Law Institute's Reporters' Study On Enterprise Responsibility For Personal Injury: A Timely Call For Punitive Damages Reform, Victor E. Schwarz, Mark A. Behrens
San Diego Law Review
This Article focuses on the Reporters' Study on Enterprise Responsibility for Personal Injury, specifically the Reporters' recommendations for punitive damages reform. The Article discusses the Study's analysis of the need for punitive damages reform, with which the author agrees. The Article also discusses the Study's recommendations concerning reform of the standard by which punitive damages should be awarded, recommendations to set reasonable limits on the size of punitive damage awards, and the recommendation of a shield against punitive damages for products that comply with federal regulatory standards. The authors find that generally the recommendations are fair and reasonable. They believe …
Impacts Of Modern Life Support Techniques On Wrongful Death Actions Brought After Final Personal Injury Judgments, Elizabeth Clark
Impacts Of Modern Life Support Techniques On Wrongful Death Actions Brought After Final Personal Injury Judgments, Elizabeth Clark
Seattle University Law Review
This Comment examines both the history of wrongful death actions and modern applications of law. This historical overview reveals that most courts reject the doctrinal bases of wrongful death actions. Specifically, when one has recovered on behalf of a decedent for fatal injuries, these courts tend to construe wrongful death statutes in a manner that denies statutory beneficiaries of a cause of action. To the extent that problems of finality and overcompensation are real, this Comment asserts that the remedy does not lie in misconstruing wrongful death acts so as to deny beneficiaries all recovery. Rather, the answer lies in …