Law Commons^™

Constitutional Torts, Common Law Torts, And Due Process Of Law, Michael L. Wells

Scholarly Works

Government officers may harm persons in many ways. When an official inflicts a physical injury, causes emotional distress, publishes defamatory statements, or initiates a malicious prosecution, the victim's traditional recourse is a tort suit brought under common law or statutory principles. But an alternative to ordinary tort may also be available. The growth of damage remedies for constitutional violations in the decades following Monroe v. Pape has encouraged litigants to frame their cases as breaches of the Constitution. These litigants may sue for damages under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 when the offender is a state employee, or assert the damages …

An Insurance-Based Compensation System For Product-Related Injuries, Richard C. Ausness

Law Faculty Scholarly Articles

In recent years, an increasing number of commentators have begun to express doubts about the effectiveness of the tort system. According to these critics, tort law does not deter accidents, nor does it spread accident costs efficiently. Worst of all, the tort system is extremely expensive to operate. Some of this criticism has spilled over into the products liability area. Products liability law has been condemned as expensive, ineffective, and regressive; in addition, it has been blamed for higher product prices, foreign competition, problems within the liability insurance industry, corporate bankruptcies, lack of product development, and the removal of useful …

Better Off Dead Than Disabled?: Should Courts Recognize A "Wrongful Living" Cause Of Action When Doctors Fail To Honor Patients' Advance Directives?, Adam A. Milani

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

Harm And Money: Against The Insurance Theory Of Tort Compensation, Heidi Li Feldman

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

Since the 1980s, tort damages for pain and suffering have excited hue and cry. Twenty-three states currently place statutory limitations on tort damages for pain and suffering: seven states cap damages in general tort cases; an additional sixteen states limit awards solely in medical malpractice cases. Several states also have provisions limiting damages in other, very specific types of tort cases. While some statutes have been invalidated on state constitutional grounds, others have survived judicial scrutiny. At the federal level, both the House of Representatives and the Senate have passed tort-reform bills. Although no compromise legislation has been enacted, this …

Beyond Formalism And False Dichotomies: The Need For Institutionalizing A Flexible Concept Of The Mediator's Role, Jeffrey W. Stempel

Scholarly Works

Related to the problem of the false dichotomy is the formalist application of the either/or construct. If, for example, one adopts as a first premise the view that mediation is by definition non-evaluative, and then rigidly applies this premise to issues of appropriate mediator behavior, the result is a formalist system that permits mediators little or no leeway to depart from the non-evaluative style. This sort of regulatory regimen may satisfy the non-evaluative ethos of some mediation scholars, but it does so at the risk of becoming a rigid system that prevents mediators from taking practical actions most appropriate to …

Conflicts And Defense Lawyers: From Triangles To Tetrahedrons, Tom Baker

All Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Pink Elephants In The Rape Trial: The Problem Of Tort-Type Defenses In The Criminal Law Of Rape, Aya Gruber

Publications

No abstract provided.

Homosexuals, Torts, And Dangerous Things, Katherine M. Franke

Faculty Scholarship

Negligent, intentional, and strict liability torts. From a canonical standpoint, whatever else one might teach, it is not a first-year torts course if these three concepts are not covered. Torts has a canon, even a Restatement. Yet a canon evolves only after some criteria of value has been established such that privileged texts can be identified according to some authoritative standard. In other words, a canon is the result of a process by which a rule of recognition identifies authoritative texts.

At what point can we say that torts became a field and an intact legal subject, the canon …

Emphasizing The Constitutional In Constitutional Torts (Symposium On Section 1983), Christina B. Whitman

Articles

It has been surprisingly difficult to extricate constitutional litigation from torts. In this Article I would like to resist once more' the idea that tort doctrines and tort categories provide a useful model for constitutional decision-making. When it comes to deciding the merits of a constitutional claim, torts is a distraction. That is the case whether torts serves as a positive model for the constitutional cause of action or as an alternative to be shunned. As part of this argument, I also question the claim2 that Monroe v. Pape,3 the 1961 case that opened the door for damages relief under …

Dealing With Evidentiary Deficiency, Richard D. Friedman

Articles

Lack of information distorts litigation. Claims or defenses that a party might prove easily, or that might even be undisputed, in a world of perfect information can be difficult or impossible to prove in the real world of imperfect information. Some information deficiencies are inevitable, at least in the sense that we could not eliminate them without incurring undue social costs. In some cases, however, a person's conduct may have caused the deficiency. More generally, the person may have had available a reasonable alternative course of conduct that would have eliminated, or at least mitigated, the deficiency. Ariel Porat and …

Paying For Suffering: The Problem Of Human Experimentation, Larry I. Palmer

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Arriving At Reasonable Alternative Design: The Reporters' Travelogue, James A. Henderson Jr., Aaron Twerski

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

Substantial commentary and controversy have been generated by the requirement in the new Restatement (Third) of Torts: Products Liability that plaintiffs in most (but not all) cases involving claims of defective product design show that a reasonable alternative design was available and that failure to adopt the alternative rendered the defendant's design not reasonably safe. Henderson and Twerski explain the origins of that requirement and show that it is not only the majority position but also comports with widely shared views regarding the proper objectives of our liability system. Although consumer expectations cannot serve as a workable, stand-alone test for …

The Preemption Pentad: Federal Preemption Of Products Liability Claims After Medtronic [V. Lohr], Robert B. Leflar, Robert S. Adler

Robert B Leflar

Taking the language of the federal consumer protection statutes out of historical context and inattentive to those laws' original purposes, judges dissatisfied with the expansion of state products liability law have in recent years read preemption provisions of these federal statutes to bar a wide range of claims that would otherwise be viable under state law. In Medtronic v. Lohr, the Supreme Court (per Justice Stevens) severely constrained the scope of the federal preemption defense in the context of the federal medical device law. But the implications of the Medtronic decision for cases involving products in other regulatory categories remain …