Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Remedies (4)
- Bankruptcy (3)
- Damages (3)
- Punitive damages (3)
- United States Supreme Court (3)
-
- Chapter 11 (2)
- Constitutional law (2)
- Environment (2)
- Exemplary damages (2)
- Federal (2)
- Litigation (2)
- Negligence (2)
- Sanctions (2)
- Administrative agency (1)
- Alternative liability (1)
- Asbestos (1)
- Attorneys' fees (1)
- Bankruptcy Court (1)
- Bondholder (1)
- Bonds (1)
- Browning-Ferris Industries Inc. v. Kelco Disposal Inc. (1)
- California (1)
- California Civil Discovery Act of 1986 (1)
- California Supreme Court (1)
- California tort law (1)
- Causation (1)
- Civil procedure (1)
- Civil rights (1)
- Class Action (1)
- Clean Air Act (1)
Articles 1 - 14 of 14
Full-Text Articles in Legal Remedies
The Damage Is Done: Ordering A New Trial Based Only On Damages, Katherine Kubale, Richard Bales
The Damage Is Done: Ordering A New Trial Based Only On Damages, Katherine Kubale, Richard Bales
Pepperdine Law Review
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59(a) allows trial courts to grant new trials to any or all of the parties, on any or all of the issues, including damages. However, the federal circuits are split on how to handle new trials based solely on damages. One croup of circuits grants partial new trials on damages alone only if the erroneous damage amount did not in any way affect the determination of any other issue. Under this standard, a new trial on damages is allowed when the second jury can evaluate the first damage award without also re-examining other issues, such …
California Expands Tort Liability Under The Novel Market Share Theory: Sindell V. Abbott Laboratories, N. Denise Taylor
California Expands Tort Liability Under The Novel Market Share Theory: Sindell V. Abbott Laboratories, N. Denise Taylor
Pepperdine Law Review
The California Supreme Court, in the novel and unprecedented case of Sindell v. Abbott Laboratories, eliminated the plaintiffs burden of identification of a negligent party, and thus the causation requirement, in a multiple party tort action. In the course of this decision, the court adopted the "market share" theory of liability which dictated in Sindell that nonidentifiable defendant-manufacturers of the generic drug DES would be liable for the damages in proportion to their share of business in the market. The author thoroughly examines various theories of recovery, such as "alternative liability," "concert of action" and "enterprise liability," which the court …
Molien V. Kaiser Foundation Hospitals: Negligent Infliction Of Emotional Distress, Michael P. Messina
Molien V. Kaiser Foundation Hospitals: Negligent Infliction Of Emotional Distress, Michael P. Messina
Pepperdine Law Review
In Molien v. Kaiser Foundation Hospitals, the California Supreme Court recognized that the interest in freedom from negligent infliction of mental distress is a protectable interest, and that an accompanying physical injury need not exist in order to recover damages. The author presents a discussion of the history and policies behind the right to recover from negligently inflicted emotional distress. The author also discusses and analyzes the court's opinion in Molien and agrees with the court that the fears of opening the floodgate of litigation which before Molien precluded recovery, was arbitrary. Finally, the author concludes that the holding is …
Punitive Damages And The Drunken Driver, William C. Cooper
Punitive Damages And The Drunken Driver, William C. Cooper
Pepperdine Law Review
A discussion of the history and theory of punitive damages which results in advocating their application in a drunk driving context after giving due consideration to the pros and cons of such a sanction. An analysis of case law will reveal the underlying rationale that has motivated certain jurisdictions in applying this severe penal approach in an attempt to deter and curtail the senseless destruction on our nation's highways as well as exploring the impetus behind those other jurisdictions that do not utilize the remedy of punitive damages. The culminating focus is on California's position in this regard. Finally, there …
Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc. V. Curran: Establishing An Implied Private Right Of Action Under The Commodity Exchange Act, Howard E. Hamann
Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc. V. Curran: Establishing An Implied Private Right Of Action Under The Commodity Exchange Act, Howard E. Hamann
Pepperdine Law Review
In the case of Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc. v. Curran, the United States Supreme Court held that there is an implied private right of action under the Commodity Exchange Act, as amended. As a result of this holding, a private party may maintain an action for damages caused by a violation of the Commodity Exchange Act. In this article, the author examines the Supreme Court's analysis and explores the future impact of the decision in light of the role the judiciary has in legislative matters.
The Supreme Court Continues Its Journey Down The Ever Narrowing Paths Of Section 1983 And The Due Process Clause: An Analysis Of Parratt V. Taylor, Robert E. Palmer
The Supreme Court Continues Its Journey Down The Ever Narrowing Paths Of Section 1983 And The Due Process Clause: An Analysis Of Parratt V. Taylor, Robert E. Palmer
Pepperdine Law Review
After nearly a century of quiet slumber, the Supreme Court awoke the sleeping giant. In the past two decades, 42 U.S.C. §1983 has evolved into a judicial Frankenstein monster. Unable to control the beast, the Court has attempted to restrict the creature's movements by unnecessarily limiting its constitutional source. If followed to its logical conclusion, the Court's narrow reading of the Constitution may ultimately demote all due process violations to state tort remedies. This note traces the legislative and judicial evolution of section 1983 as well as the statute's present interaction with the due process clause. The vehicle for this …
Ruckleshaus V. Sierra Club: Muddying The Waters Of Fee-Shifting In Federal Environmental Litigation , Jeanne A. Taylor
Ruckleshaus V. Sierra Club: Muddying The Waters Of Fee-Shifting In Federal Environmental Litigation , Jeanne A. Taylor
Pepperdine Law Review
In numerous federal environmental statutes, Congress gave plaintiffs the right to recover attorneys' fees when the court finds them "appropriate." In Ruckleshaus v. Sierra Club, the United States Supreme Court held that it was only "appropriate" to grant attorneys' fees when the plaintiff had at least partially prevailed on the merits. The decision ignored both the important role environmental groups play in the interpretation and development of regulatory programs through litigation and the ability of the lower courts to determine when attorneys' fees were "appropriate." The Court, instead, focused on the adversarial nature of such groups and the traditional American …
The Manville Corporation Bankruptcy: An Abuse Of The Judicial Process?, Mark Kunkler
The Manville Corporation Bankruptcy: An Abuse Of The Judicial Process?, Mark Kunkler
Pepperdine Law Review
Federal bankruptcy law offers a refuge to the honest debtor who is unable to pay his creditor's when his debts are due. Here, the twin aims of bankruptcy law, to give the debtor a fresh start and to provide roughly equal treatment for his! Creditors, are laudably accomplished. But what policies support the use of federal bankruptcy law when the "debtor" is in fact solvent and apparently seeks refuge only to escape liability for the products it manufactures? This comment examines the recent filing of the Manville Corporation for Chapter 11 protection under bankruptcy law with this question in mind.
The Sanction Provision Of The New California Civil Discovery Act, Section 2023: Will It Make A Difference Or Is It Just Another "Paper Tiger"? , Timothy Michael Donovan
The Sanction Provision Of The New California Civil Discovery Act, Section 2023: Will It Make A Difference Or Is It Just Another "Paper Tiger"? , Timothy Michael Donovan
Pepperdine Law Review
No abstract provided.
States Escape Liability For Copyright Infringement?, Michelle V. Francis
States Escape Liability For Copyright Infringement?, Michelle V. Francis
Pepperdine Law Review
No abstract provided.
Constitutional Restraints On The Doctrine Of Punitive Damages, Theodore B. Olson, Theodore J. Boutrous Jr.
Constitutional Restraints On The Doctrine Of Punitive Damages, Theodore B. Olson, Theodore J. Boutrous Jr.
Pepperdine Law Review
No abstract provided.
Standing To Sue A Carrier's Killers , Davis J. Howard
Standing To Sue A Carrier's Killers , Davis J. Howard
Pepperdine Law Review
No abstract provided.
Mandatory Class Action Lawsuits As A Restructuring Technique, Bryant B. Edwards, Jeffrey A. Herbst, Selina K. Hewitt
Mandatory Class Action Lawsuits As A Restructuring Technique, Bryant B. Edwards, Jeffrey A. Herbst, Selina K. Hewitt
Pepperdine Law Review
No abstract provided.
Cooperative Agreements: Government-To-Government Relations To Foster Reservation Business Development, Joel H. Mack, Gwyn Goodson Timms
Cooperative Agreements: Government-To-Government Relations To Foster Reservation Business Development, Joel H. Mack, Gwyn Goodson Timms
Pepperdine Law Review
No abstract provided.