Legal Remedies Commons^™

Buffer Zones Through The Lens Of Golf: A Negligence Case Content Analysis, Natalie Bird, Merry Moiseichik

Public Policy Faculty & Graduate Student Publications and Presentations

Buffer zones are a risk management strategy used within sport and recreation to protect participants and spectators from injury. Within the recreational golf sector, buffer zone standards do not exist. Recreational golf courses serve a wide range of customers in terms of age, skill level, and experience. A legal case content analysis of 1,561 golf negligence lawsuits answered research questions related to locations of incidents, circumstances, and injuries or damages that resulted from errant golf shots. A Westlaw search provided 133 cases within the scope of this study, 85 of which could have been possibly prevented with proper buffer zones. …

The Class Of Injuries Test: A Unifying Proposal To Determining Duty, Proximate Cause, And Superseding Cause In Negligence Claims, Judge Leonard J. Feldman, Julia Doherty

Seattle University Law Review

While there seems to be universal agreement that liability in tort cannot be unlimited, there is widespread disagreement regarding the various tests that courts utilize to limit such liability. We assume here that breach can be proven: the defendant failed to conduct themself in accordance with the salient standard of conduct (for example, failure to exercise reasonable care under all the circumstances). In the ensuing litigation, the court and jury are asked to decide several issues that each limit liability for negligence. Here, we focus on three oft-debated issues: duty, proximate cause, and superseding cause. The tests for each are …

Foreseeability And Duty In Washington Negligence Law: Leaving The Road Less Traveled By, Leo Linder

Seattle University Law Review

Washington negligence law is a confusing labyrinth of foreseeability that not even Ariadne’s string could guide plaintiffs out of. Foreseeability is implicated in four distinct analyses, several of which overlap considerably. Doctrines that were once questions of law are now questions of fact, and vice versa. Something needs to change.

Washington has taken the novel approach of bifurcating the duty element into two parts—duty’s mere existence, which is a question of law for the court to determine; and duty’s scope, which is a question of fact handed off to the jury to determine. Foreseeability impacts both of these assessments, but …

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 …

Strict Liability Upon Gunowners (Slug): A Proposed Balanced Approach, David Louis

St. Mary's Law Journal

Careless or apathetic gunowners, whose lost or stolen firearms are used in the commission of a violent crime, should be held strictly liable. Current tort law leaves victims of gun violence and their families without a mode of redress against an irresponsible gun owner whose actions played a pivotal role in the victim’s ultimate injury. Without effective liability principles to regulate gun ownership, gunowners are provided de facto immunity regardless of whether the harm suffered by the victim is intertwined with the gunowners careless behavior. This comment examines the efficacy of existing tort liability principles as provided in the Restatement …

Grotheer V. Escape Adventures, Inc., Paisley Piasecki

NYLS Law Review

No abstract provided.

The "Art" Of Future Life: Rethinking Personal Injury Law For The Negligent Deprivation Of A Patient's Right To Procreation In The Age Of Assisted Reproductive Technologies, Erika N. Auger

Chicago-Kent Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Search For A Grand Unified Theory Of Tort Law., Scott Hershovitz

Reviews

Theorists like to do a lot with a little. And not just because simple theories seem more elegant: we deepen our understanding when we learn that disparate phenomena are linked together. In physics, for example, the theory of thermodynamics showed us the relationship between mechanics and heat. In economics, the theory of the firm showed us that, across industries that look nothing alike, a simple principle helps explain the organization of economic activity. Of course, there is no guarantee that the disparate phenomena we suspect are linked actually are. Particle physicists continue to search for a Grand Unified Theory, which …

Aviation Law: Warsaw Convention Liability Principles Extend To Damage From Terrorist Attack, Leon Adams Jr.

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

Privity's Shadow: Exculpatory Terms In Extended Forms Of Private Ordering, Mark P. Gergen

Florida State University Law Review

No abstract provided.

International Mass Tort Litigation: Forum Non Conveniens And The Adequate Alternative Forum In Light Of The Bhopal Disaster, Stephen L. Cummings

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

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

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 …

Rethinking Principals Of Comparative Fault In Light Of California's Proposition 51, James A. Gash

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Negligent Infliction Of Emotional Distress: A Proposal For A Consistent Theory Of Tort Recovery For Bystanders And Direct Victims, Julie A. Greenberg

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

The September 11th Victim Compensation Fund: The Answer To Victim Relief?, Joe Ward

Pepperdine Dispute Resolution Law Journal

The events of September 11, 2001 shook America to its core. The world was forever changed as the horrific tragedy unfolded on live television. Families were destroyed as loved ones were severely injured or killed, leaving spouses and children in need of aid. In response, the United States government established the September 11th Victims' Compensation Fund in an effort to provide the necessary reparations to victims of the terrorist attacks. This article will analyze the September 11th Victims' Compensation Fund (hereafter "Fund") as a way of compensating victims while preserving the financial stability of the United States economy. This Fund …

What Does Tort Law Do? What Can It Do?, Scott Hershovitz

Articles

It’s not hard to describe what tort law does. As a first approximation, we might say that tort empowers those who suffer certain sorts of injuries or invasions to seek remedies from those who brought about those injuries or invasions. The challenge is to explain why tort does that, or to explain what tort is trying to do when it does that. After all, it is not obvious that we should have an institution specially concerned with the injuries and invasions that count as torts.

It's About Time, David Frisch

Law Faculty Publications

This Article critically evaluates the view widely held by courts that contract claims for lost leisure or personal time do not justify compensation. The thesis of this Article is that while the conventional judicial wisdom may be correct about some forms of nonpecuniary loss, it is entirely wrong regarding lost time. After setting aside assumptions, I show that traditional arguments against this form of recovery are deeply flawed Most importantly, I rely on the recognition of hedonic damages by forensic economists to debunk the myth that loss of time is no more than an everyday aspect of life not worthy …

After The Spill Is Gone: The Gulf Of Mexico, Environmental Crime, And Criminal Law, David M. Uhlmann

Articles

The Gulf oil spill was the worst environmental disaster in U.S. history, and will be the most significant criminal case ever prosecuted under U.S. environmental laws. The Justice Department is likely to prosecute BP, Transocean, and Halliburton for criminal violations of the Clean Water Act and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, which will result in the largest fines ever imposed in the United States for any form of corporate crime. The Justice Department also may decide to pursue charges for manslaughter, false statements, and obstruction of justice. The prosecution will shape public perceptions about environmental crime, for reasons that are …

Respondent Superior As An Affirmative Defense: How Employers Immunize Themselves From Direct Negligence Claims, J. J. Burns

Michigan Law Review

Most courts hold that where a defendant employer admits that it is vicariously liable for its employee's negligence, a plaintiff's additional claims of negligent entrustment, hiring, retention, supervision, and training must be dismissed. Generally, courts apply this rule based on the logic that allowing a plaintiff's additional claims adds no potential liability beyond that which has already been admitted. Furthermore, since the additional claims merely allege a redundant theory of recovery once a respondeat superior admission has been made, the prejudicial evidence of an employee's prior bad acts which often accompanies direct negligence claims against employers can be excluded without …

The Truth About Torts: Rethinking Regulatory Preemption And Its Impact On Public Health, William Buzbee, William Funk, Thomas Mcgarity, Nina A. Mendelson, Sidney Shapiro, David Vladeck, Matthew Shudtz

Other Publications

As consumers, we assume that the automobiles, pharmaceuticals, medical devices, and other products we purchase are generally safe for their intended uses. We rely on manufacturers to design and produce safe products, and we assume that federal regulators are conscientious watchdogs of the marketplace. In most instances, our assumptions are valid and we safely go about our lives. But the regulatory system is now frayed to the point that dangerous products sometimes slip through the cracks. Vioxx, Firestone/ATX tires, and toxics-laden children’s toys have endangered and harmed millions. In these cases, society depends on the state courts as a venue …

Who Knew? Admissibility Of Subsequent Remedial Measures When Defendants Are Without Knowledge Of The Injuries, Mark G. Boyko, Ryan G. Vacca

Law Faculty Scholarship

Federal Rule of Evidence 407 prohibits the introduction of subsequent remedial measures for the purposes of demonstrating negligence, culpable conduct, or product defect. But the rule breaks down, in application and purpose, when a defendant undertakes the new safety measure after the plaintiff's injury, but before the defendant had knowledge of the loss. Such a situation is not uncommon. Would-be defendants frequently improve their products and product safety for a variety of reasons. Toxic exposure cases, where exposure often predates diagnosis of the injury by a decade or more, represent a prime example of cases where defendants are likely to …

Identifying And Valuing The Injury In Lost Chance Cases, Todd S. Aagaard

Michigan Law Review

Any plaintiff seeking to recover in tort must prove that the defendant has breached the duty of care. Even after the plaintiff has established the defendant's breach of duty, however, issues of causation and damages remain. These two issues are frequently vexing, both conceptually and in terms of evidentiary demonstration. For example, if a plaintiff proves that a defendant acted negligently, it still may be unclear whether the plaintiff would have been injured even ip the absence of the defendant's negligence. Similarly, in assessing damages, factfinders often :find it difficult to attach a monetary value to a plaintiff's nonpecuniary losses …

Restating The Law: The Dilemmas Of Products Liability, Robert L. Rabin

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

Tracing products liability law from its origins to present day developments, Professor Rabin discusses the long-standing presence of interwoven strands of contract and tort ideology, as well as the perennial tensions between strict liability and negligence. These themes are evident both in the distinctly influential California case law and in the two Restatement efforts to systematize the doctrine that has emerged nationally. Rabin identifies the manner in which foundational ideological precepts of consumer expectations and enterprise liability have contributed to a continuously dynamic, if often unsettled, debate over the appropriate regime for resolving product injury claims.

Regulatory Standards And Products Liability: Striking The Right Balance Between The Two, Teresa Moran Schwartz

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

Common law courts have a long tradition of borrowing legislative and regulatory standards to define standards of care under the tort system. Treating such standards as setting minimum levels of care and safety under tort law, the courts uniformly have ruled that violations of standards constitute negligence per se, while compliance is merely evidence of negligence. Although critics of the tort system have urged legislatures and courts to adopt rules giving greater weight to regulatory compliance in products liability cases, the drafters of the Restatement (Third) of Torts: Products Liability have declined to do so. They have adopted instead an …

Comments To The Reporters And Selected Members Of The Consultative Group, Restatement Of Torts (Third): Products Liability, Howard C. Klemme

Publications

No abstract provided.

Getting To No: A Study Of Settlement Negotiations And The Selection Of Cases For Trial, Samuel R. Gross, Kent D. Syverud

Articles

A trial is a failure. Although we celebrate it as the centerpiece of our system of justice, we know that trial is not only an uncommon method of resolving disputes, but a disfavored one. With some notable exceptions, lawyers, judges, and commentators agree that pretrial settlement is almost always cheaper, faster, and better than trial. Much of our civil procedure is justified by the desire to promote settlement and avoid trial. More important, the nature of our civil process drives parties to settle so as to avoid the costs, delays, and uncertainties of trial, and, in many cases, to agree …

Unlimitation Of Liability: Vessel Owners And The Bareboat Charter After Baker V. Raymond International, Inc., Victoria M. Bald

Cardozo Law Review

No abstract provided.

Punitive Damages: A Relic That Has Outlived Its Origins, James B. Sales, Kenneth B. Cole, Jr.

Vanderbilt Law Review

The doctrine of punitive damages truly is an ancient legal concept that inexplicably has evaded commitment to the archives of history. Irrespective of the questionable validity of the doctrine at early common law, the simple fact remains that none of the historical justifications supports the punitive damage theory in today's tort reparations system. The quest to bestow increasing compensation no longer can justify punitive damage awards because actual damages currently recoverable compensate plaintiffs more than adequately for every conceivable element of physical, emotional, or imagined injury. The desire to inflict punishment, likewise, represents an insupportable basis for awarding quasi-criminal fines …

Third Party Liability For Drunken Driving: When One For The Road Becomes One For The Courts, Julius F. Lang Jr., John J. Mcgrath

Villanova Law Review (1956 - )

No abstract provided.