Law Commons^™

Draft Of Fair Use In Oracle: Proximate Cause At The Copyright/Patent Divide - 2019, Wendy J. Gordon

Scholarship Chronologically

This Paper was presented at the conference, "A Celebration of the Work of Wendy Gordon," at Boston University school of law on June 14, 2019. In presented an earlier draft under the title, Transformative Use, Proximate Cause, and Copyright, at the University of Texas at Austin on March 23, 2017. Under the title, Inegrating Judge Legal's Theory of Fair Use into on Economic View of Copyright Law: From "proximate Cause" to "Transormative Use," the paper was also presented at the March, 2016, "Conference on IP and Private Law," held at Harvard Law School. I am grateful to …

Time Is Money: An Empirical Assessment Of Non-Economic Damages Arguments, Christopher Robertson

Faculty Scholarship

Non-economic damages (pain and suffering) are the most significant and variable components of liability. Our survey of 51 U.S. jurisdictions shows wide heterogeneity in whether attorneys may quantify damages as time-units of suffering (“per diem”) or demand a specific amount (“lump sum”). Either sort of large number could exploit an irrational anchoring effect.

We performed a realistic online, video-based experiment with 732 human subjects. We replicate prior work showing that large lump sum demands drive larger jury verdicts, but surprisingly find no effect of similarly-sized per diem anchors. We do find per diem effects on binary liability outcomes, and thus …

The Supreme Court's Assault On Litigation: Why (And How) It Could Be Good For Health Law, Abigail Moncrieff

Faculty Scholarship

In recent years, the Supreme Court has narrowed or eliminated private rights of action in many legal regimes, much to the chagrin of the legal academy. That trend has had a significant impact on health law; the Court’s decisions have eliminated the private enforcement mechanism for at least four important healthcare regimes: Medicaid, employer-sponsored insurance, and medical devices. In a similar trend outside the courts, state legislatures have capped noneconomic and punitive damages for medical malpractice litigation, weakening the tort system’s deterrent capacity in those states. This Article points out that the trend of eliminating private rights of action in …

A Restatement (Third) Of Intentional Torts?, Kenneth Simons

Faculty Scholarship

Some intentional tort doctrines have developed in intriguing ways since the Restatement Second was published, and other doctrines remain contentious or obscure. For example, disagreement persists about whether the tort of battery requires merely the (single) intent to make a nonconsensual contact, or the (dual) intent both (1) to contact and (2) either to harm or to offend. The single intent view is much more plausible; the dual intent view cannot make much sense of the liability of well-intentioned doctors for battery if they exceed the patient's consent, or the liability of pranksters, or the well-accepted doctrine of apparent consent. …

Torts And Choice Of Law: Searching For Principles, Keith N. Hylton

Faculty Scholarship

If a tortious act (e.g., negligently firing a rifle) occurs in state X and the harm (e.g., killing a bystander) occurs in state Y, which state's law should apply? This is a simple example of the choice of law problem in torts. The problem arises between states or provinces with different laws within one nation and between different nations. In this article I discuss this problem largely in terms of incentive effects and also consider where this topic might be addressed in a torts course.

Common Law Disclosure Duties And The Sin Of Omission: Testing The Meta-Theories, Kimberly Krawiec, Kathryn Zeiler

Faculty Scholarship

Since ancient times, legal scholars have explored the vexing question of when and what a contracting party must disclose to her counterparty, even in the absence of explicit misleading statements. This fascination has culminated in a set of claims regarding which factors drive courts to impose disclosure duties on informed parties. Most of these claims are based on analysis of a small number of non-randomly selected cases and have not been tested systematically. This article represents the first attempt to systematically test a number of these claims using data coded from 466 case decisions spanning over a wide array of …

Comment On The Tort/Crime Distinction: A Generation Later, Michael C. Harper

Faculty Scholarship

Perhaps unsurprisingly, Professor Epstein has used the occasion of this Symposium to again voice his disapproval of the modern regulatory state.' Those of you who know me will not be surprised to hear that I disagree with the bald assertions and assumptions he makes concerning that issue. In my view, compelling reasons justify the kinds of environmental and, at least in the absence of pervasive independent employee collective representation at the work place, worker safety laws attacked by Professor Epstein.² However, I will refrain from compounding the diversion by engaging Professor Epstein on these normative issues.

Instead, I will …

Draft Of The Constitutionalization Of Intentional Torts - 1986, Wendy J. Gordon

Scholarship Chronologically

The Supreme Court has often faced the question of whether an individual who alleges that he has been injured by a state or local official or by a local governmental entity, can bring a constitutional tort action under section 1983 when state doctrines of sovereign or official immunity would make it impossible for the individual to prosecute an ordinary tort suit in the relevant state court. The Court has consistently held that when an official violates a substantive provision of the Constitution, only an immunity that is consistent with the purpose of section 1983 and the Consitution can be tolerated.