Law Commons^™

Insufficient Causes, David A. Fischer

Kentucky Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Scienter, Causation, And Harm In Freedom Of Expression Analysis: The Right Hand Side Of The Constitutional Calculus, Wilson Huhn

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

Insurance Causation Issues: The Legacy Of Bird V. St. Paul Fire & Marine Ins. Co., Peter Nash Swisher

Nevada Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Tortious Toxics, Lisa Heinzerling, Cameron Powers Hoffman

William & Mary Environmental Law and Policy Review

No abstract provided.

Proposal For Linking Culpability And Causation To Ensure Corporate Accountability For Toxic Risks, Thomas O. Mcgarity

William & Mary Environmental Law and Policy Review

No abstract provided.

Scientific Uncertainty And Causation In Tort Law, Mark Geistfeld

Vanderbilt Law Review

Tort cases involving scientific uncertainty frequently present courts with a difficult causation issue. In the paradigmatic case, the available scientific evidence indicates that a substance might be hazardous, but does not establish that the substance is hazardous.' When presented with such evidence, courts must decide whether the plaintiff has adequately proven that her injury was tortiously caused by the substance.

This causal issue potentially arises whenever we do not fully understand how a substance interacts with the body and produces an adverse health outcome. We do not, for example, adequately understand the etiology of cancer.2 To assess whether a substance …

Conjunction And Aggregation, Saul Levmore

Michigan Law Review

This Article begins with the puzzle of why the law avoids the issue of conjunctive probability. Mathematically inclined observers might, for example, employ the "product rule," multiplying the probabilities associated with several events or requirements in order to assess a combined likelihood, but judges and lawyers seem otherwise inclined. Courts and statutes might be explicit about the manner in which multiple requirements should be combined, but they are not. Thus, it is often unclear whether a factfinder should assess if condition A was more likely than not to be present - and then go on to see whether condition B …

Outrageous Fortune And The Criminalization Of Mass Torts, Richard A. Nagareda

Michigan Law Review

The case of the blameworthy-but-fortunate defendant has emerged as one of the most perplexing scenarios in mass tort litigation today. One need look no further than the front page of the newspaper to find examples of mass tort defendants said to have engaged in irresponsible conduct - even conduct that one might regard as morally outrageous in character - but that nonetheless advance eminently plausible contentions that they have not caused harm to others. This issue is not merely a matter for abstract speculation. A now-familiar mass tort scenario involves a defendant that markets a product without informing consumers about …

Identifying And Valuing The Injury In Lost Chance Cases, Todd S. Aagaard

Michigan Law Review

Any plaintiff seeking to recover in tort must prove that the defendant has breached the duty of care. Even after the plaintiff has established the defendant's breach of duty, however, issues of causation and damages remain. These two issues are frequently vexing, both conceptually and in terms of evidentiary demonstration. For example, if a plaintiff proves that a defendant acted negligently, it still may be unclear whether the plaintiff would have been injured even ip the absence of the defendant's negligence. Similarly, in assessing damages, factfinders often :find it difficult to attach a monetary value to a plaintiff's nonpecuniary losses …

Inadequate Product Warnings And Causation, Mark Geistfeld

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

The market failure that provides an economic justification for imposing tort liability on product sellers for design and manufacturing defects also justifies tort liability for inadequate warnings. In general, the liability standards proposed in the most recent draft of the Restatement (Third) of Torts: Products Liability have the potential to remedy this market failure, although this purpose is not furthered by the Draft's requirement that plaintiffs prove that an adequate warning would have prevented the injury. Unless courts presume causation (as most currently do), sellers will not have sufficient incentive to warn about unavoidable product risks. Moreover, there is no …

Torts—Change In The Arkansas Law Of Informed Consent: What's Up, Doc? Aronson V. Harriman, 321 Ark. 359, 901 S.W.2d 832 (1995)., Elizabeth Sudbury Langston

University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review

No abstract provided.

"Other Accident" Evidence In Product Liability Actions: Highly Probative Or An Accident Waiting To Happen?, Robert A. Sachs

Oklahoma Law Review

No abstract provided.

Doctors, Nurses And Superseding Cause: The Demise Of The Last In Time Defense, Charles Lattanzi

Journal of Law and Health

The question which naturally arises is whether the determination of superseding cause in this context is a question for the jury. Ohio case law has long held, as a matter of law, that the aggravation of an injury by the subsequent malpractice of a physician never breaks the chain of causation. Assuming that the original tortfeaser was negligent and that his actions caused the original injury, the only question left for the jury is whether the plaintiff herself exercised reasonable care in seeking treatment by a qualified physician. This rule was affirmed and given its common appellation, "the subsequent tortfeasor …

Allen V. The United States Of America: The “Substantial” Connection Between Nuclear Fallout And Cancer, Daniel Swartzman, Tom Christoffel

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Surrogate Motherhood And Tort Liability: Will The New Reproductive Technologies Give Birth To A New Breed Of Prenatal Tort, Nancy Hansbrough

Cleveland State Law Review

It seems inevitable that new causes of action will evolve as more childless couples resort to the use of the new reproductive methodologies. The prenatal tort claims abounding in precedent today lay a firm foundation for the recognition of a new form of tort liability. This Note will first examine briefly the history of prenatal torts, and present the status of recovery today. The Note will then examine the history and current status of the doctrine of parent-child immunity in the United States. Concentrating on these two concepts, the nature of a tort claim by an injured child for prenatal …

Toxic Substance Contamination: The Risk-Benefit Approach To Causation Analysis, Bradford W. Kuster

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

This article argues that the dilemma described above requires change and proposes a new standard for causation in this type of toxic contamination case. Part I examines the difficulties posed by conventional common law relief mechanisms, and the inadequacies of existing statutory relief mechanisms. Part II scrutinizes a more lenient burden of proof standard, the risk-benefit approach, which some courts have applied when faced with situations involving scientific uncertainties. The risk-benefit approach will be applied to causation analysis in the context of damage recoveries, using the. Hemlock, Michigan, situation as a case study. Part III discusses present congressional proposals, and …

Plaintiff's Standard Of Care After Hochfelder: Toward A Theory Of Causation, Robert P. Bryant

Vanderbilt Law Review

The extended debate by the Institute illustrates the logical and even emotional difficulty of dealing with the victim of an admittedly intentional deception who has acted foolishly in his own behalf and does not seem to deserve recovery. The crux of the controversy in the common law deceit cases mirrors that in the 10b-5 cases:should the victim have to investigate, and what might trigger an obligation to investigate? As this discussion demonstrates, tort principles provide some guidance. In deceit cases, the obligations placed on the plaintiff arise from the requirement that his reliance be justified. To the extent that his …

Battery In Medical Torts, Don S. Smith

Cleveland State Law Review

The purpose of this paper is not so much to explore when and under what circumstances a battery takes place but to deal with the problems which the classification itself creates. These include questions of the applicability of special malpractice statutes of limitation, whether an action can be maintained under the Federal Tort Claims Act, coverage under malpractice insurance policies, causation and damages, and the requirement of expert medical testimony to provide a standard against which the conduct of the defendant may be measured.

Products Liability--The Expansion Of Fraud, Negligence, And Strict Tort Liability, John A. Sebert Jr.

Michigan Law Review

While judicial acceptance of this concept of strict tort liability has been proceeding apace, far less dramatic but equally significant developments have been occurring with respect to both negligence and fraud liability. The possibility of recovering for a seller's misrepresentations concerning his product has been enhanced by a plaintiff-oriented judicial redefinition of two elements of a cause of action for fraud: defendant's knowledge of the falsity of his representation and plaintiff's reliance upon the deception. At the same time, negligence liability has often come to resemble liability without fault as courts continue to deemphasize, as a prerequisite to the application …

The Unborn Plaintiff, David A. Gordon

Michigan Law Review

It is almost twenty-five years since Professor Winfield's article "The Unborn Child" was published. The development of this area of the law during the past quarter century is probably summed up in the distinction between that title and the one to this article.

The Casual Relation Issue In Negligence Law, Leon Green

Michigan Law Review

Two significant legal studies of "Causation"-one English, one American-have been recently published. The English book brings to the subject more scholarly learning and a more comprehensive examination of its literature than any other book that has been written. The authors are devoted disciples of causation principles and make a stout defense of the causation concept as the structural core of negligence law. They examine the philosophical, common sense and semantic backgrounds of causal concepts as the basis of legal liability, find that they have merit, and launch extended, and sometimes devastating, attack upon theories that question their adequacy, though in …

Torts -- 1961 Tennessee Survey, Dix W. Noel

Vanderbilt Law Review

The tort cases reported during the past year were of unusual interest. A number of them dealt with points of first impression in this state. Others represent developments of the law designed to bring it into harmony with changing conditions, as in the application of the res ipsa loquitur doctrine to the unexplained fall of an air-liner, or in the clarification of the duties of an automobile driver to a mere licensee in the vehicle. While the basic pattern for justice in the field of torts has been worked out by our courts with much care and wisdom, occasional modifications …

Torts -- 1958 Tennessee Survey, John W. Wade

Vanderbilt Law Review

The number of torts cases was somewhat less this year than in past years, being below the forty figure rather than above it. There were no particularly significant legal developments in the field. Perhaps the cases indicate, however, a developing fashion in automobile negligence actions. At least four of the cases seem to have been brought for whiplash injuries.'

Torts -- 1957 Tennessee Survey, John W. Wade

Vanderbilt Law Review

One who performs an act is ordinarily under a duty to act carefully.When the defendant has acted there is seldom a problem regarding the duty to use care. But when the defendant has failed to act the question of duty raises a substantial problem.' The rule is stated that there is no duty to act, but the exceptions are many. One arises when there is a particular relationship between the parties; another, when the defendant had commenced to act. Both exceptions are involved in Union Carbide & Carbon Corp. v. Stapleton.

The Frightened Medical Witness; Or Globus Hystericus Must Go, David I. Sindell

Cleveland State Law Review

This article is written on behalf of the many trauma patients and their trial attorneys who discover to their horror, that their important medical witness - the "attending" doctor, - suffers from "Globus Hystericus". It is hoped that this paper may prove to be the elusive Rx to cure some difficulties raised by those few physicians (and yet there are too many) who hide their fear of the witness chair behind lame excuses, or even behind flat refusals to testify.

Preparation And Trial Of A Medical Malpratice Case, John J. Kennett

Cleveland State Law Review

Law implies from the employment of a doctor contract that the doctor will diagnose and treat his patient with that degree of skill and learning which is possessed by the average member of his profession in the community in which he practices. A doctor licensed to practice is presumed to possess such skill and learning. He does not incur liability for his mistakes if he has used methods, in his diagnosis and treatment, recognized and approved by the average member of the medical profession practicing in his community. A doctor's negligence in departing from the standard of practice in his …

Torts -- 1955 Tennessee Survey, John W. Wade

Vanderbilt Law Review

The decision of whether a defendant is negligent is normally for the jury to decide. This year, as in other years, the Tennessee courts have taken frequent opportunity to emphasize this,' though a directed verdict is proper when the jury could reasonably reach only a single result. The negligence issue is submitted to the jury in terms of the usual standard--whether the defendant acted as a reasonable prudent person would have acted under the same or similar circumstances. At times some of the circumstances may be more specifically adverted to in the instructions. Thus, under the "emergency", or "sudden peril …

Negligence - Duty Of Care - Effect Of Public Carrier's Financial Capacity On Liability, John E. Riecker S.Ed.

Michigan Law Review

Plaintiff sustained injuries when she fell between defendant's subway car and a platform directly opposite the car door. The cause assigned was the pressure from the closely packed crowd of subway passengers during a rush hour which resulted in plaintiff's being "carried by the crowd" into a position of danger. Defendant had shifted extra guards to the overcrowded area. No evidence of disorderliness or gang action appeared. In an action for damages due to defendant's negligence in failing to control the crowd, held, for defendant. Callaghan v. New York City Transit System, 204 Misc. 236, 125 N.Y.S. (2d) …

Negligence-Liability Of Manufacturer Or Vendor To An Allergic Consumer, Zolman Cavitch S.Ed.

Michigan Law Review

The study of allergies is relatively new to the medical profession. It is not surprising, therefore, that only a few courts have dealt with the problem of the liability of the manufacturer or vendor to the consumer who is allergic to an ingredient in the defendant's product. Many dyes, cosmetics, drugs and health and beauty aids in universal use, however, contain known allergenic ingredients. Medical authorities estimate the incidence of well-defined allergies at between five to ten per cent of the total population and one authority suggests that allergies are actually increasing in frequency. When we add to this parade …

Discovery-Disclosure Of Trade Secrets In Tort Action, Cleaveland J. Rice S.Ed.

Michigan Law Review

Prior to trial of suit to recover damages for hand infection alleged to have been caused by the use of defendant's washing compound, plaintiff filed interrogatories requesting the ingredients and proportions used in the compound. Defendant's offer to divulge its secret formula to the court in confidence until the plaintiff should make a prima facie case was ruled upon adversely by the court. Defendant thereupon suffered the statutory penalty of default rather than disclose the secret. Held, default judgment affirmed. In this instance trade secrets were not privileged, and there was no abuse of discretion in the trial court's …