Law Commons^™

Before And After United States V. Reliable Transfer: An Analysis Of Maritime Collision Law, Irene Johnson Barnes

University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review

No abstract provided.

Glosses On Dworkin: Rights, Principles, And Policies, Donald H. Regan

Articles

A great many people have attempted to explain what is wrong with the views of Ronald Dworkin. So many, indeed, that one who read only the critics might wonder why views so widely rejected have received so much attention. One reason is that, whatever may be wrong in Dworkin's theories, there is a good deal that is right in them. But what is right is not always clear. Important passages in Dworkin can be distressingly obscure, or tantalizingly incomplete. This essay is a set of loosely connected observations on themes from Dworkin. While I shall add some criticisms of my …

Manufacturers' Liability For Defective Product Design: A Proposed Statutory Reform, James A. Henderson Jr.

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

.

Misrepresentation In Indiana: What Hath Fraud Wrought?, Daniel C. Emerson

Indiana Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Stuart V. Hertz Corp., 351 So. 2d 703 (Fla. 1977), Richard Gordon

Florida State University Law Review

Tortl Law-INDEMNITY-ORIGINAL TORTFEASOR UNABLE TO RECOVER FOR AGGRAVATION OF PLAINTIFF'S INJURY BY NEGLIGENT ACTION OF SECOND TORTFEASOR.

Ingram V. Pettit, 340 So. 2d 922 (Fla. 1976), Charles Law Early, Jr.

Florida State University Law Review

Tort Law- NEGLIGENT INTOXICATED DRIVER LIABLE FOR PUNITIVE DAMAGES WITHOUT PROOF OF ABNORMAL OR RECKLESS DRIVING.

An Insurer's Liability To Third Parties For Negligent Inspection, Michael Braden

Kentucky Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Shipowner's Duties And Apportionment Of Liability Under The Longshoremen's And Harbor Workers' Compensation Act, Anne Hintermeister

Fordham Law Review

No abstract provided.

Wrongful Conception: Who Pays For Bringing Up Baby?, Philip Braverman

Fordham Law Review

No abstract provided.

Products Liability--Applicability Of Comparative Negligence, David A. Fischer

Faculty Publications

Products liability and comparative negligence are two very rapidly developing fields of tort law. In recent years, the vast majority of courts have adopted strict liability for harm caused by defective products. At the same time, the doctrine of comparative negligence has changed almost overnight from a doctrine that had been accepted by only a handful of jurisdictions into what is now the majority approach in this country.

Products Liability--Applicability Of Comparative Negligence To Misuse And Assumption Of The Risk, David A. Fischer

Faculty Publications

A trend is emerging to apply comparative negligence in strict products liability actions. This creates two serious difficulties. First is the question of how to compare the negligence of one party with the strict liability of the other party.

Legal Duty To The Unborn Plaintiff: Is There A Limit, Frank Gulino

Fordham Urban Law Journal

Author traces the history of legal duty in prenatal injury cases and examines the factors which contributed to the expansion and evolution of such duty. Author examines the approaches used by courts in deciding whether to grant a cause of action for prenatal injuries and analyzes recent decisions and what effect they may have on the future prenatal injury litigation.

Actuarial Liability: Erisa, Malpractice And The Equity Funding Fraud, Robert Hershan

Fordham Urban Law Journal

Article discusses the potential effect of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA) on actuaries. Article discusses how actuaries may be held accountable for negligence and whether they can be considered fiduciaries.

Recent Cases, Robert E. Banta, Oby T. Brewer, Iii, Cornelia A. Clark, I. Terry Currie, Douglas W. Ey, Jr.

Vanderbilt Law Review

Constitutional Law-First Amendment-School Authorities May Prohibit High School Student's Distribution of Sex Questionnaire to Prevent Possible Psychological Harm to Other Students Robert Edward Banta

Plaintiff, editor of a high school publication,' brought suit in federal court seeking an order compelling defendant school officials to allow the student publication to distribute a sex questionnaire,to students in the high school and to publish the results. Plaintiff claimed that defendants had not shown that the planned distribution would disrupt school activities and that, therefore, defendants'prohibition of the questionnaire violated 42 U.S.C. § 19831 and the first and fourteenth amendments. Pointing to potential psychological …