Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Law
Doomed Steamers And Merged Fires: The Problem Of Preempted Innocent Threats In Torts, Anthony M. Dillof
Doomed Steamers And Merged Fires: The Problem Of Preempted Innocent Threats In Torts, Anthony M. Dillof
Anthony M. Dillof
This article addresses a classic question of tort theory: When a court assesses damages in a negligence action, it is relevant that the defendant’s negligence prevented the plaintiff from suffering a harm? For example, imagine that defendant Taxi Driver negligently crashes his taxi thereby injuring plaintiff Passenger. Is it relevant that because of the accident, Passenger did not reach the ocean liner he had been planning to sail on and, as a result, his life was saved because, as it turns out, the ocean liner sank, killing everyone aboard? Though this question has been recognized and addressed for almost a …
Modal Retributivism: A Theory Of Sanctions For Attempts And Other Criminal Wrongs, Anthony M. Dillof
Modal Retributivism: A Theory Of Sanctions For Attempts And Other Criminal Wrongs, Anthony M. Dillof
Anthony M. Dillof
How much punishment, in terms of size and severity, should a person get committing for a given offense? Operating in a deontological framework, the article attempts to answer the question of criminal punishment severity in a unified, principled manner. There is a wide-spread intuition that when it comes to figuring out what punishment a person deserves, &#;harm matters.&#; The idea that Aharm matters@ is the basis for harm-based retributivism. The article begins by critiquing harm-based retributivism. Proponents of harm-based retributivism believe that attempts should be punished less than completed offenses, but how much less? One-half? Three-quarters? The problem with harm-based …
Modal Retributivism: A Theory Of Sanctions For Attempts And Other Criminal Wrongs, Anthony M. Dillof
Modal Retributivism: A Theory Of Sanctions For Attempts And Other Criminal Wrongs, Anthony M. Dillof
Anthony M. Dillof
How much punishment, in terms of size and severity, should a person get committing for a given offense? Operating in a deontological framework, the article attempts to answer the question of criminal punishment severity in a unified, principled manner. There is a wide-spread intuition that when it comes to figuring out what punishment a person deserves, harm matters. The idea that “harm matters” is the basis for harm-based retributivism. The article begins by critiquing harm-based retributivism. Proponents of harm-based retributivism believe that attempts should be punished less than completed offenses, but how much less? One-half? Three-quarters? The problem with harm-based …