Law Commons^™

Differentiating Strict Products Liability’S Cost-Benefit Analysis From Negligence, Paul F. Rothstein, Ronald J. Coleman

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

Dangerous products may give rise to colossal liability for commercial actors. Indeed, in 2021, the U.S. Supreme Court denied certiorari in Johnson & Johnson v. Ingham, permitting a more than two billion dollar products liability damages award to stand. In his dissenting opinion in another recent products liability case, Air and Liquid Systems Corp. v. DeVries, Justice Gorsuch declared that “[t]ort law is supposed to be about aligning liability with responsibility.” However, in the products liability context, there have been ongoing debates concerning how best to set legal rules and standards on tort liability. Are general principles of …

Tort Theory And The Restatement, In Retrospect, Keith N. Hylton

Faculty Scholarship

This is my third paper on the Restatement (Third) of Torts. In my first paper, The Theory of Tort Doctrine and the Restatement (Third) of Torts, I offered a positive economic theory of the tort doctrine that had been presented in the Restatement (Third) of Torts: General Principles, and also an optimistic vision of how positive theoretical analysis could be integrated with the Restatement project. In my second paper, The Economics of the Restatement and of the Common Law, I set out the utilitarian-economic theory of how the common law litigation process could generate optimal (efficient, wealth-maximizing) rules and compared …

Biased But Reasonable: Bias Under The Cover Of Standard Of Care, Maytal Gilboa

Georgia Law Review

Inequities in the distribution of healthcare are widely acknowledged to plague the United States healthcare system. Controversies as to whether anti-discrimination law allows individuals to bring lawsuits with respect to implicit rather than intentional bias render negligence law an important avenue for redressing harms caused by implicit bias in medical care. Yet, as this Article argues, the focus of negligence law on medical standards of care to define the boundaries of healthcare providers’ legal duty of care prevents the law from adequately deterring implicit bias and leaves patients harmed by biased treatment decisions without redress for their losses, so long …

Minding Accidents, Teneille R. Brown

University of Colorado Law Review

Tort doctrine states that breach is all about conduct. Unlike in the criminal law context, where jurors must engage in amateur mindreading to evaluate mens rea, jurors are told that they can assess civil negligence by looking only at the defendant’s external behavior. But this is false. Here I explain why, by incorporating the psychology of foresight. Foreseeability is at the heart of negligence—appearing as the primary test for duty, breach, and proximate cause. And yet, it has been called a “vexing morass” and a “malleable standard” because it is so poorly understood. This Article refines and advances the construct …

Civil Liability For Sexual Misconduct, Mike K. Steenson

Mitchell Hamline Law Review

No abstract provided.

The "Accident Network": A Network Theory Analysis Of Proximate Causation, Anat Lior

Marquette Law Review

In torts, proximate causation, or legal cause, examines whether harmful negligent conduct is “closely enough related” to the damages that ensue. Torts professors often use the metaphor of a stone being thrown into a pond to explain this rather amorphous legal doctrine. The ripples the stone creates surrounding it are the direct result of the act of it being thrown. The stone tossed into the pond, i.e., a negligent act, created an effect which perpetuated via ripples to a long distance, forever changing the entire pond, i.e., causing close and far damages. Can all of those affected by the negligent …

Three Kinds Of Fault: Understanding The Purpose And Function Of Causation In Tort Law, Marin R. Scordato

University of Miami Law Review

Causation is a concept of enormous importance in the law. In just the last two years, the United States Supreme Court has explicitly considered its importance and meaning on at least three occasions, in areas of the law as diverse as specific personal jurisdiction, Title IX, and Section 1981. It has also been the subject of sustained scholarly examination and debate.

In no area of the law is causation as foundational and omni- present as in tort law, and in no sphere within tort law is it more prevalent than in its dominant cause of action, negligence. Unsurprisingly then, the …

Negligence And Culpability: Reflections On Alexander And Ferzan, Mitchell N. Berman

Faculty Scholarship at Penn Carey Law

Philosophers of criminal punishment disagree about whether infliction of punishment for negligence can be morally justified. One contending view holds that it cannot be because punishment requires culpability and culpability requires, at a minimum, advertence to the facts that make one’s conduct wrongful. Larry Alexander and Kim Ferzan are prominent champions of this position. This essay challenges that view and their arguments for it. Invoking a conceptual distinction between an agent’s being blameworthy for an act and their deserving punishment (or suffering) for that act, it explains that an agent can be blameworthy for negligent conduct, and thus liable to …

Tort Liability And Unawareness, Surajeet Chakravarty, David Kelsey, Joshua C. Teitelbaum

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

We explore the implications of unawareness for tort law. We study cases where injurers and victims initially are unaware that some acts can yield some consequences, or alternatively that some acts or consequences are even possible, but later become aware. Following Karni and Viero (2013) we model unawareness by Reverse Bayesianism. We compare the two basic liability rules of Anglo-American tort law, negligence and strict liability, and argue that negligence has an important advantage over strict liability in a world with unawareness—negligence, through the stipulation of due care standards, spreads awareness about the updated probability of harm.

Tort Law Implications Of Compelled Physician Speech, Nadia N. Sawicki

Indiana Law Journal

Abortion-specific informed consent laws in many states compel physicians to communicate state-mandated information that is arguably inaccurate, immaterial, and inconsistent with their professional obligations. These laws face ongoing First Amendment challenges as violations of the constitutional right against compelled speech. This Article argues that laws compelling physician speech also pose significant problems that should concern scholars of tort law.

State laws that impose tort liability on physicians who refuse to communicate a state-mandated message often do so by deviating from foundational principles of tort law. Not only do they change the substantive disclosure duties of physicians under informed consent law, …

Title Ix Sex Discrimination & Negligence Lawsuit Against Fargo Public School District & The Board Of Education Partially Dismissed, Emily J. Houghton

Human Performance Department Publications

Brian and Jennifer Berg filed a lawsuit as individuals and on behalf of their daughter Regan against the Fargo Public School District (FPSD) and the Board of Education in the City of Fargo in 2021. They argued that Regan faced sex discrimination, deliberate indifference under Title IX, the FPSD Handbook and negligence from FPSD following an alleged sexual assault by a male student off-campus.

Is A Locomotive In Use And Therefore Subject To Locomotive Inspection Act Liability When It Makes A Temporary Stop?, Anne Marie Lofaso

Law Faculty Scholarship

Case at a Glance: LeDure v. Union Pacific Railroad Company. Bradley LeDure, a long-time locomotive engineer for Union Pacific, slipped on the slick surface of a locomotive while it was idle but powered on, seriously injuring himself. If Union Pacific violated safety regulations under the Locomotive Inspection Act, then it would be negligent per se. But that theory of liability is only available if the locomotive was in use at the time of the accident. The case presents a question of statutory interpretation of the term use.

Pros And Kahns: The Proper Coach Liability Standard For Athlete Injuries In Collegiate Athletics, Mark R. Hamilton Jr.

Marquette Sports Law Review

No abstract provided.

Tort Law: Cases And Commentaries, Samuel Beswick

All Faculty Publications

The law of obligations concerns the legal rights and duties owed between people. Three primary categories make up the common law of obligations: tort, contract, and unjust enrichment. This coursebook provides an introduction to tort law: the law that recognises and responds to civil wrongdoing. The material is arranged in two parts. Part I comprises §§1-11 and addresses intentional and dignitary torts and the overarching theories and goals of tort law. Part II comprises §§12-25 and addresses no-fault compensation schemes, negligence, nuisance, strict liability, and tort law’s place within our broader legal systems.

Themes explored within this coursebook include:

• …

Individualizing Criminal Law’S Justice Judgments: Shortcomings In The Doctrines Of Culpability, Mitigation, And Excuse, Paul H. Robinson, Lindsay Holcomb

Faculty Scholarship at Penn Carey Law

In judging an offender’s culpability, mitigation, or excuse, there seems to be general agreement that it is appropriate for the criminal law to take into account such things as the offender’s youthfulness or her significantly low IQ. There is even support for taking account of their distorted perceptions and reasoning induced by traumatic experiences, as in battered spouse syndrome. On the other hand, there seems to be equally strong opposition to taking account of things such as racism or homophobia that played a role in bringing about the offense. In between these two clear points, however, exists a large collection …

Understanding The Negligence Question, Garo V. Moughalian

Lincoln Memorial University Law Review Archive

There is currently an unsolved problem in the legal literature regarding the role cost-benefit analysis should play in determinations of breach in negligence cases. Additionally, despite extensive writings, the relationship between duty and breach in negligence cases remains unclear. At the core of the problem lies the inadequacy of our understanding of breach, which, currently established through a number of independent constructs, lacks a fundamental conceptual base. Further complicating matters is the limited study afforded the nature of the negligence cause of action itself, which leaves the element of duty on unsound footing. This article fills those gaps. With an …

Contract Remedies Need Not Undercompensate Aspiring Parents When Cryopreserved Reproductive Material Is Lost Or Destroyed: Recovery Of Consequential Damages For Emotional Disturbance When Breach Of Contract Results In The Lost Opportunity To Become Pregnant With One's Own Biological Child, Joseph M. Hnylka

Journal of Law and Health

The Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has reported that the use of assisted reproductive technology (ART) has doubled over the past decade. In vitro fertilization (IVF) is the most prevalent form of ART. During IVF, a woman’s eggs are extracted, fertilized in a laboratory setting, and then implanted in the uterus. Many IVF procedures use eggs or sperm that were stored using a process called cryopreservation. A recent survey reported that cryopreservation consultations increased exponentially during the coronavirus pandemic, rising as much as 60 percent. It is estimated that more than one million embryos are stored in cryopreservation …

Contracting Out Liability For Negligent Pre-Contractual Misrepresentation, Daniele Bertolini

Dalhousie Law Journal

This article examines the extent to which entire agreement clauses (EACs) and non-reliance clauses (NRCs) are enforceable to preclude actions for negligent pre-contractual misrepresentations. It is argued that courts could improve legal certainty and contractual fairness by adopting two distinct legal rules to be applied, respectively, to contracts between sophisticated parties and in adhesion contracts. First, it is suggested that in contracts between sophisticated parties only specific contractual barriers to actions should provide a complete defence against negligent misrepresentation claims. Under this rule, the exclusionary effect of EACs and NRCs would be achieved only if an express term of the …

The Liability Of Health Care Providers To Third Parties Injured By A Patient, Samuel D. Hodge Jr.

Pace Law Review

Duty of care is a critical component of any negligence claim necessary to establish liability. It is well recognized at common law that a physician owes a duty to advise a patient but is not mandated to take affirmative measures outside the physician-patient relationship to protect a third-party. Health care providers may also be responsible for oversight, or the failure to safeguard a patient, due to a special relationship they undertake, such as failing to properly diagnose or recommend an appropriate treatment plan. Recently, the courts have struggled over whether public policy and fairness require the expansion of the law …

Minding Accidents, Teneille R. Brown

Utah Law Faculty Scholarship

Tort doctrine states that breach is all about conduct. Unlike in the criminal law, where jurors must engage in an amateur form of mindreading to evaluate mens rea, jurors are told that they can assess civil negligence by looking only at how the defendant behaved. But this is false. Foreseeability is at the heart of negligence—appearing as the primary tests for duty, breach, and proximate cause. And yet, we cannot ask whether a defendant should have foreseen a risk without interrogating what he subjectively knew, remembered, perceived, or realized at the time. In fact, the focus on actions in negligence …

The Identity Criterion: Resuscitating A Cardozian, Relational Approach To Duty Of Care In Negligence, Tim Kaye

Hofstra Law Review

Everyone agrees that the canonical case in American negligence law is Palsgraf v. Long Island Railroad Co. In his famous majority opinion in the New York Court of Appeals, Chief Judge Benjamin Cardozo held that the outcome of the case turned on whether the plaintiff, Mrs. Palsgraf, had been owed a duty of care by the Long Island Railroad. He declared that the answer to this question depended on whether the parties had a relevant relationship at the time of the conduct under consideration. “Negligence, like risk,” he said, is “a term of relation. Negligence in the abstract, apart from …

Remediating Racism For Rent: A Landlord’S Obligation Under The Fha, Mollie Krent

Michigan Law Review

The Fair Housing Act (FHA) is an expansive and powerful piece of legislation that furthers equal housing in the United States by ferreting out discrimination in the housing market. While the power of the Act is well recognized by courts, the full contours of the FHA are still to be refined. In particular, it remains unsettled whether and when a landlord can be liable for tenant-on-tenant harassment. This Note argues, first, that the FHA does recognize liability in such a circumstance and, second, that a landlord should be subject to liability for her negligence in such a circumstance. Part I …

Computational Complexity And Tort Deterrence, Joshua C. Teitelbaum

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

Standard formulations of the economic model of tort deterrence constitute the injurer as the unboundedly rational bad man. Unbounded rationality implies that the injurer can always compute the solution to his care-taking problem. This in turn implies that optimal liability rules can provide robust deterrence, for they can always induce the injurer to take socially optimal care. In this paper I examine the computational complexity of the injurer's care-taking problem. I show that the injurer's problem is computationally tractable when the precaution set is unidimensional or convex, but that it is computationally intractable when the precaution set is multidimensional and …

When Justice Should Precede Generosity: The Case Against Charitable Immunity In Arkansas, Courtney Jane Baltz

Arkansas Law Notes

This Comment discusses various aspects of the modern hospital and examines charitable immunity’s incompatibility with modern law.

First, Part II explains the historical justifications for immunity and presents the doctrine’s landscape in the United States. Part III examines the role precedent plays in continuing to adhere to the rule of immunity. Part IV takes an in-depth approach of the big business of hospitals by evaluating various financial aspects of charitable hospitals. Part V explores the reality of charitable immunity falling out of touch with concepts of modern law. Part VI takes a more specific look at the application of the …

(Un)Masking The Truth - The Cruel And Unusual Punishment Of Prisoners Amidst The Covid-19 Pandemic, Ariel Berkowitz

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

I Am Woman, Hear Me Roar: Denial Of Sexual Reassignment Surgery For Transgender Inmates And The Eighth Amendment’S Ban On Cruel And Unusual Punishment, Chiara Haueter

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Euclid Proviso, Ezra Rosser

Articles in Law Reviews & Other Academic Journals

This Article argues that the Euclid Proviso, which allows regional concerns to trump local zoning when required by the general welfare, should play a larger role in zoning's second century. Traditional zoning operates to severely limit the construction of additional housing. This locks in the advantages of homeowners but at tremendous cost, primarily in the form of unaffordable housing, to those who would like to join the community. State preemption of local zoning defies traditional categorization; it is at once both radically destabilizing and market-responsive. But, given the ways in which zoning is a foundational part of the racial and …

The Informed Consent Doctrine In Legal Malpractice Law, Vincent R. Johnson

Faculty Articles

The doctrine of informed consent is now deeply embedded into the law of legal ethics. In legal malpractice litigation, the doctrine holds that a lawyer has a duty to disclose to a client material information about the risks and alternatives associated with a course of action. A lawyer who fails to make such required disclosures and fails to obtain informed consent is negligent, regardless of whether the lawyer otherwise exercises care in representing a client. If such negligent nondisclosures cause damages, the lawyer can be held accountable for the client's losses.

Shifting the focus of a legal malpractice action from …

The Nonfiduciary "Trust", Jeffrey A. Schoenblum

Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications

This article identifies and details the emergence in an increasing number of states of a new trust law that rejects the fundamental tenets of traditional trust law. This alternative concept of the trust liberates the trustee from any meaningful accountability to the beneficiary, the very core concept of traditional trust law. In short, these states are enabling the creation of what might be described as a "nonfiduciary trust."

Baldia Town Factory Inferno: Justice Delayed And Denied, Rabia Bugti

MSJ Capstone Projects

The Baldia Town Factory Fire — as it came to be known — was one of the deadliest incidents in the history of Pakistan — the 9/11 of the country.

Over 260 ill-fated people lost their lives in the garments factory named Ali Enterprises, 16 of whom were charred beyond recognition. In September this year, finally after eight years, the anti-terrorism court announced its verdict (ANTI-TERRORISM COURT, 2017). Two key culprits were sentenced to death and four handed life imprisonment. According to the joint investigation team’s report, the factory was set on fire deliberately by the facilitators of a political …