Law Commons^™

Privacy's Double Standards, Scott Skinner-Thompson

Publications

Where the right to privacy exists, it should be available to all people. If not universally available, then privacy rights should be particularly accessible to marginalized individuals who are subject to greater surveillance and are less able to absorb the social costs of privacy violations. But in practice, there is evidence that people of privilege tend to fare better when they bring privacy tort claims than do non-privileged individuals. This disparity occurs despite doctrine suggesting that those who occupy prominent and public social positions are entitled to diminished privacy tort protections.

This Article unearths disparate outcomes in public disclosure tort …

Finding Lost & Found: Designer’S Notes From The Process Of Creating A Jewish Game For Learning, Owen Gottlieb

Articles

This article provides context for and examines aspects of the design process of a game for learning. Lost & Found (2017a, 2017b) is a tabletop-to-mobile game series designed to teach medieval religious legal systems, beginning with Moses Maimonides’ Mishneh Torah (1180), a cornerstone work of Jewish legal rabbinic literature. Through design narratives, the article demonstrates the complex design decisions faced by the team as they balance the needs of player engagement with learning goals. In the process the designers confront challenges in developing winstates and in working with complex resource management. The article provides insight into the pathways the team …

Segovia V. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 133 Nev. Adv. Op. 112 (Dec. 28, 2017), Alexis Wendl

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The Court determined that (1) the 2015 amendment that added “physician assistant” to NRS 41A was not intended to clarify the previous statute’s original intent; and (2) The 2015 Legislature intended for the 2015 amendment that added “physician assistant” to NRS Chapter 41A to apply prospectively.

Peck V. Zipf, 133 Nev. Adv. Op. 108 (Dec. 28, 2017), Jeff Chronister

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

Under NRS 41A.071, a plaintiff’s malpractice claim must be dismissed if the claim is not accompanied by an expert affidavit, but NRS 41A.100(1) states that the expert affidavit need not be submitted if the medical malpractice claim is argued under the res ipsa loquitur doctrine. Because the appellant failed to prove that the instrument left in his body was the result of surgery, the claim was properly dismissed in that the claim did not satisfy the elements to permit the statutory exception of the res ipsa loquitur doctrine. Likewise, NRS 41A.071 does not violate the Equal Protection or Due Process …

State, Dep’T. Of Bus. And Indus., Fin. Inst. Div. V. Dollar Loan Ctr., L.L.C., 133 Nev Adv. Op. 103 (Dec. 26, 2017) (En Banc), Emily Meibert

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The Court determined that NRS 604A.408(2)(f) bars a licensee from bringing any type of enforcement action on a refinancing loan under the statute. This is because allowing for enforcement action would go against the legislative purpose of the statute.

Mays V. City Of Flint, Michigan, Nathan A. Burke

Public Land & Resources Law Review

In Mays v. City of Flint Michigan, Michigan Department of Environmental Quality employees removed a class action against them in the Michigan state court to federal court under the federal-officer removal statute. This court ruled in favor of the residents of Flint, determining that the federal officer removal statute did not give the federal court jurisdiction over a state agency simply because the agency must follow federal rules. The court held that Michigan Department of Environmental Quality employees could not have been “acting under” the federal government even though the state agency’s enforcement authority could be trumped by the …

United States V. Osage Wind, Llc, Summer Carmack

Public Land & Resources Law Review

The Osage Nation, as owner of the beneficial interest in its mineral estate, issues federally-approved leases to persons and entities who wish to conduct mineral development on its lands. After an energy-development company, Osage Wind, leased privately-owned surface lands within Tribal reservation boundaries and began to excavate minerals for purposes of constructing a wind farm, the United States brought suit on the Tribe’s behalf. In the ensuing litigation, the Osage Nation insisted that Osage Wind should have obtained a mineral lease from the Tribe before beginning its work. In its decision, the Tenth Circuit applied one of the Indian law …

Budzko V. One City Center Associates Limited Partnership: Maine's Unique Approach To Business Owners' Duty To Remove Ice And Snow, Jennifer A.W. Williams

Maine Law Review

In February 2001, the Maine Supreme Judicial Court, sitting as the Law Court, decided for the first time in Budzko v. One City Center Associates Limited Partnership, what duty of care a business landowner owes to business invitees regarding the accumulation of ice and snow during a storm. Terry Budzko slipped and fell as she was exiting One City Center, the building in which her employer leased office space. The steps had not been shoveled or sanded and a snowstorm had been progressing throughout the day. The Law Court, placing heavy reliance on the factor of foreseeability, held that “[b]usiness …

Time To Reconsider Nullum Tempus Occurrit Regi - The Applicability Of Statutes Of Limitations Against The State Of Maine In Civil Actions, Sigmond D. Schutz

Maine Law Review

Many states, including the State of Maine, take the position that they have, essentially, an infinite time within which to bring a civil action. The basis for the State's claim of immunity from statutes of limitations is the old English common law doctrine, “nullum tempus occurrit regi”-- literally, no time runs against the King--which purports to exempt the State from statutes of limitations of general applicability unless statutes expressly provide otherwise. There has not been a Maine Supreme Judicial Court (Law Court) opinion mentioning the nullum tempusdoctrine since 1955, but the doctrine continues to be actively asserted by the State …

Premises Liability And Apportionment Following Martin V. Six Flags Over Georgia Ii, L.P., Madeline E. Mcneeley, Jed D. Manton

Mercer Law Review

A nineteen-year-old boy's innocent trip to an amusement park ended in a brutal beating and permanent brain damage. The boy's efforts to hold accountable those responsible for the tragedy ultimately resulted in much-needed clarification of Georgia's law regarding negligent security and apportionment of fault. It is now clear that a landlord can be held responsible for damages caused by criminal activity even when the damages occur beyond the four corners of the landlord's property. Likewise, Martin elucidates that errors in a jury's apportionment verdict can be retried without disturbing the verdict as to liability and damages.

Torts, Christopher R. Breault, Christopher B. Newbern, Brian C. Mickelsen

Mercer Law Review

This Article surveys recent developments in Georgia tort law between June 1, 2016 and May 31, 2017.

Product Liability, Franklin P. Brannen Jr., P. Michael Freed, Kristen S. Cawley, Marcus Strong

Mercer Law Review

This Article surveys developments in Georgia product liability law between June 1, 2015 and May 31, 2017. It covers noteworthy cases decided during this period by the Georgia Supreme Court, Georgia Court of Appeals, the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, and the United States district courts located in Georgia.

Fake News: No One Is Liable, And That Is A Problem, Emma M. Savino

Buffalo Law Review

No abstract provided.

Vicarious Liability, Non-Delegable Duty And The Ng Huat Seng Decision, Kee Yang Low

Research Collection Yong Pung How School Of Law

In recent times, courts in Singapore and elsewhere have been grappling with the issue of delegability of duty of care. In the process, they have vigorously defended the conventional position that a duty of care is, in general, delegable. Accordingly, attempts at broadening the ambit of vicarious liability and non-delegable duty, respectively, have been carefully scrutinized. The recent Singapore Court of Appeal decision of Ng Huat Seng v Munib Mohammad Madni adds to the judicial thinking on this complicated and controversial subject.

Doing Away With Battery Law, Anthony J. Sebok

Articles

No abstract provided.

Book Review, Anthony J. Sebok

Articles

No abstract provided.

Successor Liability In The Bankruptcy Context: The Problem Or The Solution?, Chelsea Donenfeld

Cardozo Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Road To Autonomy, Michelle Sellwood

San Diego Law Review

[T]his Comment discusses the background of AI and robotics, the technology behind the autonomous vehicle, and the evolution of products liability laws. Part III examines current regulations, the benefits of autonomous technology, and the need for a definitive liability framework. Part IV discusses why current tort liability laws will be ineffective in governing autonomous vehicle liability by examining the shift in liability from the driver to the owner and manufacturer. Part V proposes a short-term solution by attributing liability to the programmer, while software is still hard-coded. Finally, Part VI explores legal personhood, and proposes that the autonomous vehicle be …

Vicarious Liability, Non-Delegable Duty And The Ng Huat Seng Decision, Kee Yang Low

Research Collection Yong Pung How School Of Law

This article considers the evolving law relating to the delegability of the duty of care and the principle of vicarious liability, focusing particularly on the recent Singapore Court of Appeal decision in Ng Huat Seng v Munib Mohammad Madni.

The Corporate Face Of The Alien Tort Claims Act: How An Old Statute Mandates A New Understanding Of Global Interdependence, Lorelle Londis

Maine Law Review

In the past thirty-five years, international human rights lawyers and, more recently, international environmental lawyers, have been invoking the Alien Tort Claims Act (ATCA) as a tool to prosecute human rights abuses committed abroad by transnational corporations (TNs) in U.S. federal courts. The ATCA provides: “The district courts shall have original jurisdiction of any civil action by an alien for a tort only, committed in violation of the law of nations or a treaty of the United States.” Although plaintiffs' lawyers have experienced some success in the human rights context, most claims of environmental abuses have failed. In all these …

Church Liability For Clergy Sexual Abuse: Have Time And Events Overthrown Swanson V. Roman Catholic Bishop Of Portland?, Sonia J. Buck

Maine Law Review

In Swanson v. Roman Catholic Bishop of Portland, Albert and Ruth Swanson sued their former pastor, Father Maurice Morin, after the couple's marriage counseling sessions with Father Morin led to a sexual relationship between Father Morin and Mrs. Swanson. The Swansons brought claims against Father Morin for negligent and intentional infliction of emotional distress and negligent pastoral counseling. They also sued the Roman Catholic Bishop of Portland, a corporation, and Bishop Joseph Gerry in his personal capacity (collectively referred to as the “Church”) for negligence in selecting, training, and supervising Father Morin. The Maine Superior Court dismissed the claims against …

Negligence Per Se Theories In Pharmaceutical & Medical Device Litigation, Andrew E. Costa

Maine Law Review

The notion of addressing the vagaries of negligence per se theories in the context of pharmaceutical and medical device litigation seems to promise little more than a monograph anesthetized by a body of obscure pharmaceutical and medical device provisions viewed through the lenses of various states' negligence law. Maybe little more than that can be assured. However, the issue of how courts should address negligence per se theories in this context implicates a variety of “larger” (or, possibly, more interesting) legal issues in general and pharmaceutical and medical device litigation in particular. Perhaps foremost among these issues is the interaction …

When Fame Takes Away The Right To Privacy In One's Body: Revenge Porn And Tort Remedies For Public Figures, Caroline Drinnon

William & Mary Journal of Race, Gender, and Social Justice

No abstract provided.

Treating Wrongs As Wrongs: An Expressive Argument For Tort Law, Scott Hershovitz

Articles

The idea that criminal punishment carries a message of condemnation is as commonplace as could be. Indeed, many think that condemnation is the mark of punishment, distinguishing it from other sorts of penalties or burdens. But for all that torts and crimes share in common, nearly no one thinks that tort has similar expressive aims. And that is unfortunate, as the truth is that tort is very much an expressive institution, with messages to send that are different, but no less important, than those conveyed by the criminal law. In this essay, I argue that tort liability expresses the judgment …

Defective Punitive Damage Awards, Jill Wieber Lens

Utah Law Review

Private redress theories of punitive damages recognize an individual victim’s right to be punitive. That right exists because the defendant knew its conduct would probably cause the victim a severe injury, yet the defendant still acted, willfully injuring the victim. The injured victim can seek and obtain punitive damages to punish the defendant for disrespecting her rights.

This Article is the first to apply private redress theories of punitive damages to claims involving a defective product. This application is unexpectedly difficult because of the importance of evidence of harm to nonparties in establishing defect, and because the defendant’s knowledge of …

The Net Effects Of Medical Malpractice Tort Reform On Health Insurance Losses, W. Kip Viscusi, Patricia H. Born, J. Bradley Karl

Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications

In this paper, we examine the influence of medical malpractice tort reform on the level of private health insurance company losses incurred. We employ a natural experiment framework centered on a series of tort reform measures enacted in Texas in 2003 that drastically altered the medical malpractice environment in the state. The results of a difference-in-differences analysis using a variety of comparison states, as well as a difference-in-difference-in-differences analysis, indicate that ameliorating medical malpractice risk has little effect on health insurance losses incurred by private health insurers.

Doctor's Duty Of Disclosure And The Singapore Court Of Appeal Decision In Hii Chii Kok: Montgomery Transformed, Kee Yang Low

Research Collection Yong Pung How School Of Law

The subject of a doctor’s duty of care to his patient, especially as regards the giving of advice, is a controversial one. In recent times, the courts and the medical professions in several jurisdictions have given their varying responses. In the Hii Chii Kok case, the Singapore Court of Appeal was faced with the difficult challenge of whether to and, if so, how to change the law. The judgment is as complex as it is important.

Szymborski V. Spring Mtn. Treatment Ctr., 133 Nev. Adv. Op. 80 (Oct. 26, 2017), Paloma Guerrero

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The Court determined medical malpractice, and subsequent adherence to NRS 41A.071, involves a medical diagnosis, treatment, or judgment, and when the standards of care pertaining to the medical issue require explanation to the jury from a medical expert at trial. Therefore, Szymborski’s claims for negligence, malpractice, gross negligence, negligence per se, and negligent hiring, training, and supervision state claims for relief which were not based on a medical treatment or judgment and should not have been dismissed for failure to attach the NRS 41A.071 affidavit.

Clark Cty. Sch. Dist. V. Payo, 133 Nev. Adv. Op. 79 (Oct. 26, 2017), Alma Orozco

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

Implied assumption of the risk does not apply when a student is required to participate in a physical education class because the doctrine’s “voluntariness” element is not satisfied. Discretionary-function immunity does not apply when cases allege inadequate supervision or instruction because such decisions, while discretionary, are not policy-based, as the discretionary-immunity test requires. Decisions are not entitled to discretionary-function immunity unless they entail governmental planning or policy formulation, which involves economic, social, and political considerations.

Unconstitutional Asymmetry Or A Rational Basis For Inconsistency? The Admissibility Of Medical Malpractice Prelitigation Screening Panel Findings Before And After Smith V. Hawthorne I And Ii, Matthew Asnault Morris

Maine Law Review

Pre-litigation screening panels have been instrumental in streamlining medical malpractice litigation in the State of Maine by culling claims from superior court dockets, encouraging settlements, and providing findings of fact that could prove useful for a jury if the case proceeds to trial. In enacting one particular provision governing the confidentiality and the admissibility of the screening panel process, however, the legislature may have sacrificed the constitutional rights of medical malpractice claimants in favor of a lighter docket. Two recent cases before the Law Court, Smith I and II, have challenged the constitutionality of Maine’s unique statutory approach to the …