Law Commons^™

“Danger Is My Business”: The Right To Manufacture Unsafe Products, Richard C. Ausness

Law Faculty Scholarly Articles

While no one would dispute that safety is a desirable objective, it may not always be an absolute priority. Rather, in some cases, other societal interests such as personal autonomy, consumer choice, product cost, and performance may trump legitimate safety goals. This is reflected in some of the doctrines and defenses that have evolved to protect the producers of unsafe products against tort liability. Some of these doctrines, such as those determining liability for the producers of optional safety equipment, inherently dangerous products, products with obvious hazards, and prescription drugs and medical devices, are part of the law of products …

Not Just For Products Liability: Applying The Economic Loss Rule Beyond Its Origins, Danielle Sawaya

Fordham Law Review

Most litigants, if given the chance, prefer to assert tort theories to recover their economic losses, rather than rely on the remedies provided under contract law. This is primarily because plaintiffs have the potential to recover more damages under tort law than contract law. However, most courts have adopted a doctrine known as the economic loss rule to bar plaintiffs from asserting certain tort theories to recover for their economic loss. Although the economic loss rule may seem like an easy way to maintain the boundary between tort law and contract law, confusion abounds when courts attempt to determine the …

The Role Of Litigation In The Fight Against Prescription Drug Abuse, Richard C. Ausness

Law Faculty Scholarly Articles

Prescription drug abuse problems have prompted a number of responses by both drug users (and abusers) and by various federal and state government agencies.

Part I of this Article examines the impressive array of liability theories that individual litigants have relied upon in their lawsuits against Purdue. These theories include: negligence; strict products liability, including design defect and inadequate warning claims; breach of the implied warranty of merchantability; violation of state consumer protection statutes; negligent marketing; fraudulent misrepresentation; civil conspiracy; and "malicious conduct." Purdue, the company that developed OxyContin, has pursued an aggressive "no settlement" policy and has chosen to …

Strict Products Liability At 50: Four Histories, Kyle Graham

Marquette Law Review

This Article offers four different perspectives on the strict products- liability “revolution” of a half-century ago. One of these narratives relates the predominant assessment of how this movement coalesced and spread across the states. The three alternative histories introduced by this Article view the shift toward strict products liability through populist, practical, and contingent lenses, respectively. The first of these narratives considers the contributions that plaintiffs and their counsel made toward this change in the law. The second focuses upon how a formerly common, but now moribund, type of products-liability lawsuit framed the argument for strict liability as a superior …