Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Law Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Articles 1 - 5 of 5

Full-Text Articles in Law

Revising Section 402a: The Limits Of Tort As Social Insurance, James A. Henderson Jr. Oct 1993

Revising Section 402a: The Limits Of Tort As Social Insurance, James A. Henderson Jr.

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.


A Proposed Revision Of Section 402a Of The Restatement (Second) Of Torts, James A. Henderson Jr., Aaron Twerski Sep 1992

A Proposed Revision Of Section 402a Of The Restatement (Second) Of Torts, James A. Henderson Jr., Aaron Twerski

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.


Stargazing: The Future Of American Products Liability Law, James A. Henderson Jr., Aaron Twerski Nov 1991

Stargazing: The Future Of American Products Liability Law, James A. Henderson Jr., Aaron Twerski

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.


Closing The American Products Liability Frontier: The Rejection Of Liability Without Defect, James A. Henderson Jr., Aaron Twerski Nov 1991

Closing The American Products Liability Frontier: The Rejection Of Liability Without Defect, James A. Henderson Jr., Aaron Twerski

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

For over one hundred years American courts expanded the rights of plaintiffs in products liability cases. First the courts eliminated the privity requirement, next the necessity of proving fault, and finally, the necessity of proving a production defect. The next logical step in this progression would be to eliminate the need to show any type of defect at all. In this Article, Professors Henderson and Twerski assert that this step cannot and will not be taken. They explore both the possibility of across-the-board liability without defect and the more limited idea of product-category liability without defect. They describe how a …


The Design Defect Test In Washington: The Requisite Balance, Joshua J. Preece Jan 1985

The Design Defect Test In Washington: The Requisite Balance, Joshua J. Preece

Seattle University Law Review

This Comment examines Washington's application of the design defect consumer expectations test. Washington courts have been inconsistent during the recent transition in products liability law. A case in point is Conner v. Skagit Corp.," in which the plaintiff was allowed to proceed with a design defect cause of action while offering proof of only one factor from the consumer expectations test. Accordingly, this Comment suggests that design defect plaintiffs must offer proof of multiple factors that relate to the issue of defectiveness and reasonableness. This proposal will be discussed in light of regional and national products liability theory and …