Law Commons^™

Foreword: Legal Malpractice Is No Longer The Profession's Dirty Little Secret, Susan Saab Fortney

Faculty Scholarship

In 1994, Professor Manuel R. Ramos published a law review article called, Legal Malpractice: The Profession's Dirty Little Secret. As suggested by the title, Professor Ramos argued that legal malpractice was a "taboo subject" that has been "ignored by the legal profession, law schools, mandatory continuing legal education ("CLE") programs, and even by scholarly and lay publications." Thirty years later, legal malpractice is an ever-present threat that lawyers cannot afford to ignore.

Negligence And Two-Sided Causation, Keith N. Hylton, Haizhen Lin, Hyo-Youn Chu

Faculty Scholarship

We extend the economic analysis of negligence and intervening causation to "two-sided causation" scenarios. In the two-sided causation scenario the effectiveness of the injurer's care depends on some intervention, and the risk of harm generated by the injurer's failure to take care depends on some other intervention. We find that the distortion from socially optimal care is more severe in the two-sided causation scenario than in the one-sided causation scenario, and generally in the direction of excessive care. The practical lesson is that the likelihood that injurers will have optimal care incentives under the negligence test in the presence of …

Accessory Liability In Tort And Equity, Pey Woan Lee

Research Collection Yong Pung How School Of Law

Unlike the position in criminal law, there does not currently exist a general doctrine of accessory liability in civil law. Thus, a person may be liable as an accessory in equity for dishonestly assisting with a breach of trust, but there is no tort for dishonest assistance. Rather, one who participates in another's tort will only be liable if he is a joint tortfeasor acting pursuant to a common design with the primary tortfeasor. This article examines the reasons for this divergence and evaluates the case for their assimilation. It observes that, contrary to common perception, the scope of participatory …

The Illusive "Reasonable Person": Can Neuroscience Help The Mentally Disabled?, Ian J. Cosgrove

Notre Dame Law Review

This Note argues that the distinction between what constitutes a physical versus a mental disability can no longer rationally be sustained. Specifically, its purpose is to show that providing an exception to the “reasonable person” standard in negligence actions for the physically disabled while withholding it for those with mental infirmities is increasingly indefensible. Part I briefly tracks the origins of the current rule in tort law that holds the mentally and physically disabled to separate standards. This discussion is purposely left short because of the breadth of scholarship tracing the standard. Part II seeks to justify, through neuroscientific brain …

Naquin V. Elevating Boats, Llc: The Fifth Circuit’S Improper Expansion Of Jones Act “Seaman Status” Qualification, Timothy M. O'Hara

Pace Law Review

The story began nearly a century ago, when Congress enacted the Jones Act and effectively made “seamen the most generously treated personal injury victims in American law.” But defining a Jones Act seaman has not come easy, as it took the United States Supreme Court seventy five years to arrive at the modern seaman status test. This commentary examines the “tortured history” of the Jones Act, how qualification for the statute’s protections has evolved, the modern seaman status test, and the implications of the Fifth Circuit’s recent application thereof. Section II gives a brief history and explanation of maritime law …

Environmental Hedonism Or, Securing The Environment Through The Common Law, George P. Smith Ii, David M. Steenburg

William & Mary Environmental Law and Policy Review

No abstract provided.

What We Have Here Is A Failure To Compensate: The Case For A Federal Damages Remedy In Koontz "Failed Exactions", Christopher M. Kieser

William & Mary Environmental Law and Policy Review

In Nollan v. California Coastal Commission, 483 U.S. 825 (1987), and Dolan v. City of Tigard, 512 U.S. 374 (1994), the Supreme Court held that an agency could not, consistent with the Takings Clause, condition a permit on a land exaction unless the exaction bears an “essential nexus” and “rough proportionality” to the harms the government seeks to mitigate. Then, in Koontz v. St. Johns Water Management District, 133 S. Ct. 2586 (2013), the Court extended Nollan and Dolan to exactions that were never completed because the property owner refused to acquiesce to the demand. Nevertheless, the Court held that …

Newsroom: Logan On Drone Law, Roger Williams University School Of Law

Life of the Law School (1993- )

No abstract provided.

Personal Jurisdiction Based On The Local Effects Of Intentional Misconduct, Allan Erbsen

William & Mary Law Review

Intentional misconduct frequently has extraterritorial consequences. Terrorist attacks, toxic pollution, civil rights violations, and other intentional torts can cause harm within a state despite originating outside the state. Those harms raise a vexing constitutional question: when do the local effects of intentional wrongdoing authorize personal jurisdiction over a defendant whose conduct occurred outside the forum? The answer has several significant implications. Granting or denying jurisdiction can support or undermine regulatory interests by allocating power between states, imposes burdens on the parties that can impede access to justice, and alters risk assessments that shape both socially desirable and socially destructive behavior.

Double Damages Or Nothing: Whether Medicare Advantage Organizations Have A Private Cause Of Action Under The Medicare Secondary Payer Act, Jennifer A. Prevete

St. John's Law Review

(Excerpt)

Part I of this Note outlines the history and purpose of the Medicare statute, Medicare Advantage, and the MSP Act. The MSP Act dictates that insured individuals pursue coverage from “primary plans” while Medicare makes conditional payments with the agreement that the primary plans will reimburse the costs. Part II provides the MSP Act’s spectrum of interpretations and why the United States Circuit Courts of Appeals have read the private cause of action with varying expansiveness. Part III concludes that the private cause of action should not be extended to MAOs, asserting that the extension ultimately results in harm …

For Every Wrong, A Remedy: A Narrow Interpretation Of The Locomotive Inspection Act's Preemptive Scope In Asbestos Cases, Andrew Malzahn

Hamline Law Review

*

In Praise Of Ex Ante Regulation, Brian Galle

Vanderbilt Law Review

The plaintiffs' daughter was four years old when they brought her in to the local medical clinic. Clinic staff gave the girl a sedative to keep her calm while they examined her, but they miscalculated the dose, and she later died.' Tort liability, or the specter of it, is supposed to discourage these kinds of preventable tragedies. The clinic's owner, fearing a potential crippling award to bereaved families, should have trained his staff more carefully. As it happens, the owner instead had carefully scooped all the assets out of the firm. When the girl's parents won a $34.6 million award …

On Regulatory Discord And Procedure, Elizabeth Chamblee Burch

Scholarly Works

Businesses are increasingly global. But domestic courts’ jurisdiction remains largely provincial; both public and private regulators have overlapping, mismatched authority. Regulatory discord is readily apparent in consumer protection cases. When the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act empowered state regulators while simultaneously creating an encompassing federal regulator—the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau—it further contributed to overlap between federal agencies, states, and private litigation.

Whether this regulatory magnetism is optimal in terms of fundamental goals like compensation and deterrence is a hotly debated normative and empirical question. Yet, one need not wade too far into the substantive debate to appreciate …

Constructing Issue Classes, Elizabeth Chamblee Burch

Scholarly Works

As government budgets shrink each year, enforcement responsibilities in products liability, consumer protection, and employment discrimination fall increasingly to private attorneys. But defendants have successfully layered new objections about noncohesive classes and unascertainable members atop legislative and judicial reforms to cripple plaintiffs’ attorneys’ chief weapon — the class action. The result? Courts deny class certification and defendants escape enforcement by highlighting the differences among those affected by their misconduct. At the other end of the regulatory spectrum lies the opposite problem. Some defendants’ actions are so egregious that hordes of public and private regulators can’t help but get involved — …

Constitutional Remedies: Reconciling Official Immunity With The Vindication Of Rights, Michael L. Wells

St. John's Law Review

(Excerpt)

Part I makes the crucial point that compensation is a tool and not a distinct goal of tort liability. With civil recourse theory as a guidepost, Part II argues that one of the aims of constitutional tort law is vindication of the plaintiffs rights. Civil recourse principles teach that vindication may be at least partly achieved even when immunity blocks compensation. Part III shows how the Court's failure to distinguish vindication from compensation has unnecessarily impeded the vindication of rights. Two important official immunity cases-Camreta v. Greene and Pearson v. Callahan -illustrate the missed opportunities and show how …

Reasonable Precaution For The Individual, Dov Waisman

St. John's Law Review

(Excerpt)

This Article has four parts. In Part I, I introduce the question to be explored and describe Barbara Fried's challenge to any attempt to answer that question without summing costs and benefits across persons. Part II responds directly to Fried's challenge, presenting the individualized feasibility principle as a viable, nonaggregative interpretation of reasonable precaution. In Part III, I explore the theoretical underpinnings of the IFP, drawing on a theory of normative ethics known as ex ante contractualism. Part IV concludes.

The Shortcomings Of New York's Long-Arm Statute: Defamation In The Age Of Technology, Robert D. Nussbaum

St. John's Law Review

(Excerpt)

This Note suggests that the New York legislature amend New York's long-arm statute so that it no longer excludes the tort of defamation as a basis for long-arm jurisdiction. Part I provides a brief background and history of jurisdiction and longarm statutes in general. It also focuses on New York's statute more specifically. Part II focuses on the arguments for excluding acts of defamation from long-arm jurisdiction and compares New York's statute to those of other states. Finally, Part III examines the different policy reasons for changing the statute and argues that such a change will not offend Due …

When They Don't Want Your Corn: The Most Effective Tort Claims For Plaintiffs Harmed By Seed Companies Whose Genetically Engineered Seeds Produced More Problems Than Profits, Sarah Holm

Hamline Law Review

*

Uncapping Compensation In The Gore Punitive Damage Analysis, Shaakirrah R. Sanders

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

BMW of North America, Inc. v. Gore rests, in part, on the “understandable relationship” between a civil jury’s award of compensatory and punitive damages. Gore designates Due Process a protectant against excessive civil jury awards, in effect outmaneuvering the civil jury trial right. Gore identifies three guideposts to determine whether punitive damages are excessive: (1) the degree of reprehensibility of a defendant’s conduct; (2) the disparity between compensatory and punitive damages; and (3) the difference between punitive damages and civil penalties authorized or imposed in comparable cases.

This Article focuses on the second of Gore’s three guideposts, which examines the …

The Electronic Document Retention System Ate My Homework: Gross Negligence And The Rebuttable Presumption Of Prejudice Within The Doctrine Of Spoliation In Federal Courts, Tristan Evans-Wilent

St. John's Law Review

(Excerpt)

This Note argues against imposing such a rebuttable presumption where the spoliating party acted with gross negligence. Part I provides a general background of the doctrine of spoliation and its application to electronic information. Part II examines the three different approaches taken by the federal circuits to whether gross negligence should trigger a rebuttable presumption that the spoliated evidence was prejudicial to the spoliating party. Finally, Part III argues that courts should not allow gross negligence to trigger a rebuttable presumption that the spoliated evidence was prejudicial to the spoliating party.

Anderson V. Mandalay Corp., Nev. Adv. Op. 82 (Oct. 10, 2015), Emily Haws

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The Court determined (1) NRS § 41.745(1)(c) sets forth a factual inquiry; (2) a reasonable jury could find it “reasonably foreseeable under the facts and circumstances of the case considering the nature and scope of his . . . employment” that a hotel employee would rape a hotel guest; and (3) direct negligence claims against an employer are not futile when a reasonable jury could conclude under the facts that the employer could reasonably foresee the employee’s unlawful act.

Judging Multidistrict Litigation, Elizabeth Chamblee Burch

Presentations and Speeches

Professor Elizabeth Chamblee Burch presented "Judging Multidistrict Litigation" at Duke University School of Law's Mass-Tort MDL Program for Judicial Conference Committees on October 8, 2015.

A New Test To Reconcile The Right Of Publicity With Core First Amendment Values, Nat Stern, Mark Joseph Stern

Scholarly Publications

No abstract provided.

The Economic Loss Doctrine: Intrinsic Or Extrinsic Fraud, Ralph Anzivino

Marquette Law Review

The economic loss doctrine provides that when a product is sold and results in economic loss for the buyer (no property or personal injury), the buyer’s sole remedy is to sue for breach of contract, not in tort. The two exceptions to the economic loss doctrine are contracts that are predominately for services and contracts where a party is fraudulently induced to enter into the contract.

Fraudulent inducement occurs when one party either fails to disclose a material fact or knowingly misrepresents a significant fact, and thereby induces the other party to enter into a contract. The fraudulent inducement, however, …

The Diffusion Of Doctrinal Innovations In Tort Law, Kyle Graham

Marquette Law Review

This Article examines the spread of “successful” common-law doctrinal innovations in the law of torts. Its analysis reveals recurring influences upon and tendencies within the diffusion of novel tort doctrines across the states. The studied diffusion patterns also document a trend toward common-law doctrinal “stabilization” over the past quarter-century. As detailed herein, this stabilization owes in part to altered adoption dynamics associated with the ongoing shrinkage and fragmentation of the common-law tort dockets entertained by state supreme courts. Prevailing conditions will make it difficult, this Article concludes, for even well-received common-law doctrinal innovations of the future to match the rapid …

Enduring Doctrine: The Collateral Source Rule In Wisconsin Injury Law, Joseph P. Poehlmann

Marquette Law Review

When the common law collateral source rule first arose in the area of tort law over one hundred years ago, only a minority of individuals maintained health insurance coverage to protect against loss in the event that a negligent actor injured them. Today, however, the vast majority of Americans are covered. Because of this change in the landscape of insurance coverage, many jurisdictions have abrogated or greatly eroded the collateral source rule under the belief that the rule no longer holds a justified role in personal injury litigation. Wisconsin, however, continues to follow the common law form of the rule …

Section 230 Of The Communications Decency Act: The True Culprit Of Internet Defamation, Heather Saint

Loyola of Los Angeles Entertainment Law Review

This Note highlights the growing concern of Internet defamation and the lack of viable legal remedies available to its victims. Internet defamation is internet speech with the purpose to disparage another’s reputation. At common law, a victim of alleged defamation has the right to file suit against not only the original speaker of the defamatory statements, but the person or entity to give that statement further publication as well. In certain cases even the distributor, such as a newspaper stand, can be held liable for a defamation claim. However, liability due to defamatory speech on the Internet is quite different. …

Drug Design Liability: Farewell To Comment K, Aaron Twerski, James A. Henderson Jr.

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

"A Distinction Without A Difference"?: Bartlett Going Forward, Steven A. Schwartz

Fordham Law Review

    This Note addresses the question of whether federal law preempts state design defect claims against generic drug manufacturers regardless of which test state law uses to determine whether a drug is defective. This issue, arising out of the U.S. Supreme Court's interpretation of preemption jurisprudence and fundamental tort law as stated in Mutual Pharmaceutical Co. v. Bartlett, is significant because it plays a large role in determining to what extent generic drug manufacturers are immune to civil liability arising out of injuries caused by their generic drugs. In an age of rising medical costs and jury awards, both plaintiff …

The Corporate Conspiracy Vacuum, J. S. Nelson

Cardozo Law Review

In the absence of charges available for traditional conspiracy, public and judicial frustration with agents' lack of accountability has led to the distortion of alternative doctrines in efforts to impose liability on what should have been traditional conspiracy prosecutions. This paper examines those efforts and their impact on these alternative doctrines.