Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 16 of 16
Full-Text Articles in Law
Split-Recovery: A Constitutional Answer To The Punitive Damage Dilemma, Clay R. Stevens
Split-Recovery: A Constitutional Answer To The Punitive Damage Dilemma, Clay R. Stevens
Pepperdine Law Review
No abstract provided.
Cigarette Litigation's Offspring: Assessing Tort Issues Related To Guns, Alcohol, & Other Controversial Products In Light Of The Tobacco Wars , Gary T. Schwartz
Cigarette Litigation's Offspring: Assessing Tort Issues Related To Guns, Alcohol, & Other Controversial Products In Light Of The Tobacco Wars , Gary T. Schwartz
Pepperdine Law Review
No abstract provided.
Litigating The Holocaust: A Consistent Theory In Tort For The Private Enforcement Of Human Rights Violations , Derek Brown
Litigating The Holocaust: A Consistent Theory In Tort For The Private Enforcement Of Human Rights Violations , Derek Brown
Pepperdine Law Review
No abstract provided.
Acceptance Speech: The Fleming Award 2004, Allen M. Linden
Acceptance Speech: The Fleming Award 2004, Allen M. Linden
Pepperdine Law Review
No abstract provided.
Congress's Power To Preempt The States, Stephen Gardbaum
Congress's Power To Preempt The States, Stephen Gardbaum
Pepperdine Law Review
In this Article, part of a symposium on federal preemption of state tort law, I build upon my earlier work on the nature of preemption to try and deepen the conceptual and constitutional foundations of the subject. I argue that this neglected dimension must be moved to center stage if preemption doctrine is to have a coherent and principled framework. In particular, the key issues are the nature, source, and limits of Congress's power to preempt the states. The result is that preemption should be understood as a discretionary power of Congress the source of which lies in the Necessary …
An Essay On Torts: States Of Argument, Marshall S. Shapo
An Essay On Torts: States Of Argument, Marshall S. Shapo
Pepperdine Law Review
This essay summarizes high points in torts scholarship and case law over a period of two generations, highlighting the “states of argument” that have characterized tort law over that period. It intertwines doctrine and policy. Its doctrinal features include the traditional spectrum of tort liability, the duty question, problems of proof, and the relative incoherency of damages rules. Noting the cross-doctrinal role of tort as a solver of functional problems, it focuses on major issues in products liability and medical malpractice. The essay discusses such elements of policy as the role of power in tort law, the tension between communitarianism …
Exporting United States Tort Law: The Importance Of Authenticity, Necessity, And Learning From Our Mistakes, Victor E. Schwartz, Christopher E. Appel
Exporting United States Tort Law: The Importance Of Authenticity, Necessity, And Learning From Our Mistakes, Victor E. Schwartz, Christopher E. Appel
Pepperdine Law Review
No abstract provided.
Torts As Public Wrongs, Michael L. Rustad
Torts As Public Wrongs, Michael L. Rustad
Pepperdine Law Review
This Article is a rejoinder to the civil recourse theorist's claim that tort law will be better served by retreating to the philosopher's prefecture of private wrongs. A subsidiary goal of this Article is to refute John Goldberg's claim that my sociologically-inspired theory of torts as public wrongs serves the interests of tort reformers rather than American consumers. In a nutshell, civil recourse theory is "tort reform in disguise," not the concept of torts as fulfilling wide-ranging purposes such as the social control of corporations. If judges adopt civil recourse theory, they will be less inclined to recognize new causes …
Peculiar Risk In American Tort Law, Ellen S. Pryor
Peculiar Risk In American Tort Law, Ellen S. Pryor
Pepperdine Law Review
American tort law includes a significant strand of liability tied to an intriguing concept variously termed “peculiar risk,” “special danger,” and “special risk inherent in the work,” among others. Peculiar risk presents a basis for liability different from other standards or actions that trigger liability in tort law - it is different from intent, recklessness, negligence, nuisance, and abnormally dangerous activity. Both England and the United States endorsed versions of the doctrine in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. Yet, by 1965, American and English tort law had sharply diverged on the doctrine. American courts continued to apply it; …
The Impact Of U.S. Tort Law In Canada, Lewis N. Klar
The Impact Of U.S. Tort Law In Canada, Lewis N. Klar
Pepperdine Law Review
This paper briefly summarizes some of the reasons offered by Professor Peter Cane for the minimal impact that U.S. tort law has had on the tort law of Australia and New Zealand. It discusses this matter from the perspective of Canadian tort law. It suggests that, for a variety of reasons, Canada is in a unique position; it shares some of the same characteristics of the Commonwealth countries which discourage the adoption of U.S. tort law, but at the same time is exposed to countervailing factors which tend to bring Canadian and U.S. tort laws closer together. It illustrates this …
The Impact Of The Civil Jury On American Tort Law, Michael D. Green
The Impact Of The Civil Jury On American Tort Law, Michael D. Green
Pepperdine Law Review
This article, a contribution to a symposium on the what American tort law can contribute to the rest of the world expresses skepticism that a considerable swath of U.S. tort law would be of interest to the rest of the world. The thesis is that American tort law has been shaped by the existence of the civil jury, unique to the U.S, and areas of domestic tort law so influenced have no utility internationally. The article catalogues many such areas and discusses several of them.
Tort In Three Dimensions, John C.P. Goldberg
Tort In Three Dimensions, John C.P. Goldberg
Pepperdine Law Review
Should our tort law serve as a model for other nations? The answer depends in part on what one understands it to be. Since the mid-Twentieth Century, progressives have favored 'thin' accounts that treat tort law as having but two dimensions: forum and function. Tort, they say, provides a general forum for grievances and, by doing so, performs certain governmental functions, such as deterrence of anti-social conduct, compensation of injury victims, and the bringing to light of abuses of power. Progressives have favored thin accounts mainly because those accounts emphasize the extent to which tort law enables courts to achieve …
What The United States Taught The Commonwealth About Pure Economic Loss: Time To Repay The Favor, Bruce Feldthusen
What The United States Taught The Commonwealth About Pure Economic Loss: Time To Repay The Favor, Bruce Feldthusen
Pepperdine Law Review
No abstract provided.
International Tobacco Litigation's Evolution As A United States Torts Law Export: To Canada And Beyond?, Richard L. Cupp Jr.
International Tobacco Litigation's Evolution As A United States Torts Law Export: To Canada And Beyond?, Richard L. Cupp Jr.
Pepperdine Law Review
In the late 1990’s, the states’ healthcare reimbursement lawsuits against the tobacco industry were settled for approximately $246 billion. In the wake of this enormous settlement, many similar lawsuits were initiated in other nations or by other nations. Most of these early healthcare reimbursement lawsuits failed. However, in 2005, the World Health Organization Framework Convention on Tobacco Control was finalized by over 150 nations, and today has been ratified by 168 nations. The Framework encourages nations to consider tort litigation against tobacco sellers as a way to limit tobacco usage. Canada’s provinces have been particularly aggressive in seeking to use …
Apportioning Responsibility Among Joint Tortfeasors For International Law Violations, Roger P. Alford
Apportioning Responsibility Among Joint Tortfeasors For International Law Violations, Roger P. Alford
Pepperdine Law Review
With the new wave of claims against corporations for human rights violations – particularly in the context of aiding and abetting government abuse – there are unusually difficult problems of joint tortfeasor liability. In many circumstances, one tortfeasor – the corporation – is a deep-pocketed defendant, easily subject to suit, but only marginally involved in the unlawful conduct. Another tortfeasor – the sovereign – is a central player in the unlawful conduct, but, with limited exceptions, is immune from suit under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act. A third tortfeasor – the low-level security personnel – accused of actually committing the …
American Tort Law: Shining Beacon?, Allen Linden
American Tort Law: Shining Beacon?, Allen Linden
Pepperdine Law Review
No abstract provided.