Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
- Publication Year
Articles 1 - 11 of 11
Full-Text Articles in Law
Judicial Application Of Ohio's Comparative Negligence Statute, Michael J. Olah, Paul F. Meyerhoefer
Judicial Application Of Ohio's Comparative Negligence Statute, Michael J. Olah, Paul F. Meyerhoefer
Akron Law Review
In the case of Wilfong v. Batdorf the Ohio Supreme Court reexamined the issue of the retroactive application of Ohio's comparative negligence statute. Ohio's statute abolishing the defense of contributory negligence in a tort action was passed with an effective date of June 20, 1980, and the court faced the task of deciding whether comparative fault measurements could be used in an action arising prior to the effective date of the statute, but not coming to trial until after the effective date of the act. Previously the court had the opportunity to examine this issue in the case of Viers …
Controversial Defenses To Legal Malpractice Claims: Are Attorney-Experts Being Asked To Be Advocates?, David S. Caudill
Controversial Defenses To Legal Malpractice Claims: Are Attorney-Experts Being Asked To Be Advocates?, David S. Caudill
St. Mary's Journal on Legal Malpractice & Ethics
Attorney-experts in legal malpractice litigation are like many other experts. Although easily distinguishable from experts offering science based testimony, attorney expertise is similar to that of witnesses offering experience-based testimony, and very much like the expertise of a physician in a medical malpractice case. An attorney-expert is, however, somewhat unique among experts in terms of the type of expertise offered, the inherent risk that the expert's testimony will invade the province of the judge or jury, and, I believe, the risk of over-testifying. First, there is a problem of defining the attorney-expert's "expertise" to ensure that the expert is not …
So Long Sweetheart - State Farm Fire & (And) Casualty Co. V. Gandy Swings The Pendulum Further To The Right As The Latest In A Line Of Setbacks For Texas Plaintiffs., Timothy D. Howell
So Long Sweetheart - State Farm Fire & (And) Casualty Co. V. Gandy Swings The Pendulum Further To The Right As The Latest In A Line Of Setbacks For Texas Plaintiffs., Timothy D. Howell
St. Mary's Law Journal
Some legal commentators would analogize the description of the prisoner of The Pit and the Pendulum to modern tort law and policy. Like a pendulum, tort law is always in motion, swinging between two ideologies: those being the plaintiff-oriented rights of the 1970s-80s, and the tort-reforms which began in the mid-80s. This trend continued until the 1990s and the decision of State Farm Fire & Casualty Co. v. Gandy where Texas plaintiffs began experiencing setbacks. The Gandy decision likely curtails the use of the “sweetheart deal” a practice, in which an insured defendant first settles with the plaintiff, then assigns …
Reformers' Regress: The 1991 Texas Workers' Compensation Act., Jill Williford
Reformers' Regress: The 1991 Texas Workers' Compensation Act., Jill Williford
St. Mary's Law Journal
The revision of the Texas Workers’ Compensation Act will affect most Texas taxpayers and workers. The Act, entering into force January 1, 1991, significantly restructures the preexisting seventy-six-year-old system. Before the advent of workers’ compensation systems employees relied on the court and common-law causes of action as the sole means of recovery. In 1913, Texas enacted one of the first versions of workers’ compensation in the United States. The original act created a system to compensate workers for injuries sustained during employment without regard to fault. Initially the act was elective for employers and mandatory for employees but was later …
Assumption Of Risk In New York Under Cplr 1411: Complete Bar Or Comparative Fault?, Thomas P. Lalor
Assumption Of Risk In New York Under Cplr 1411: Complete Bar Or Comparative Fault?, Thomas P. Lalor
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
Innocent Injury And Loss Distribution: The Florida Pure Comparative Negligence System, Vincent S. Walkowiak
Innocent Injury And Loss Distribution: The Florida Pure Comparative Negligence System, Vincent S. Walkowiak
Florida State University Law Review
No abstract provided.
Comparative Negligence And Automobile Liability Insurance, Cornelius J. Peck
Comparative Negligence And Automobile Liability Insurance, Cornelius J. Peck
Michigan Law Review
The purpose of this article is not to re-plow the ground of history, case law, and statutory developments which has been so competently tilled by others. Nor is the purpose to give a detailed consideration of each of the practical matters mentioned above. Instead, the focus of this article is on the relationship between comparative negligence and automobile liability insurance. Insurance rates and accident statistics, rather than rules of law and cases, are the primary materials. Such a consideration of the subject it might be hoped would give a positive and substantiated answer to the frequently debated but never documented …
The Michigan Supreme Court - An Analysis Of Recent Decisions, Frederic F. Brace Jr., James A. Park
The Michigan Supreme Court - An Analysis Of Recent Decisions, Frederic F. Brace Jr., James A. Park
Michigan Law Review
It is the purpose of this comment to attempt to determine and evaluate just what the court's role has been. Attention will be directed to selected areas of non-statutory and statutory law, with specific emphasis placed upon the areas of contributory negligence and workmen's compensation.
The Burden Of Pleading Contributory Negligence In Kentucky, Gladney Harville
The Burden Of Pleading Contributory Negligence In Kentucky, Gladney Harville
Kentucky Law Journal
No abstract provided.
Courts-Power To Direct Verdicts Where Forbidden By State Constitution
Courts-Power To Direct Verdicts Where Forbidden By State Constitution
Michigan Law Review
ln a suit for personal injuries the district court of the United States for the district of Arizona directed a verdict for the defendant on the ground that the plaintiff was guilty of contributory negligence. The constitution of Arizona, sec. 5, art. 18 provides: "The defense of contributory negligence or of assumption of risk shall, in all cases whatsoever, be a question of fact and shall, at all times, be left to the jury." Held, that this section is not binding on a federal court sitting in Arizona, and does not prevent such court from directing a verdict when …
The Institute's Restatement And The Michigan Law, Herbert F. Goodrich
The Institute's Restatement And The Michigan Law, Herbert F. Goodrich
Michigan Law Review
The task which the American Law Institute has undertaken is to make a statement of the common law, in its various branches. The end in view is not codification; indeed the idea is directly opposed to codification. It is hoped to have, when the work is completed, an accurate statement of existing common law, carefully and systematically made, from which local variations and peculiarities have been ironed out. It is hoped, in other words, to restore both accuracy and continuity to the pattern of the common law fabric as it is woven in our judicial mills.