Law Commons^™

Vicarious Liability For Ai, Mihailis E. Diamantis

Indiana Law Journal

When an algorithm harms someone—say by discriminating against her, exposing her personal data, or buying her stock using inside information—who should pay? If that harm is criminal, who deserves punishment? In ordinary cases, when A harms B, the first step in the liability analysis turns on what sort of thing A is. If A is a natural phenomenon, like a typhoon or mudslide, B pays, and no one is punished. If A is a person, then A might be liable for damages and sanction. The trouble with algorithms is that neither paradigm fits. Algorithms are trainable artifacts with “off” switches, …

The Texas Two-Step: How Corporate Debtors Manipulate Chapter 11 Reorganizations To Dance Around Mass Tort Liability, Laura S. Rossi

Emory Bankruptcy Developments Journal

The purpose of the bankruptcy system is to grant a “fresh start” to the honest but unfortunate debtor, while the purpose of the tort system is to make injured parties “whole” again. As a result, these systems inevitably clash when a business debtor files for bankruptcy while there are pending tort claims against it. The tension between these systems has reached a whole new level following the emergence of a new strategy deemed the “Texas Two-Step.”

A Texas statute leaves open a loophole for otherwise solvent companies to dodge mass tort liabilities and protect their assets, leaving injured plaintiffs with …