Torts Commons^™

The Products Liability Crisis: Modest Proposals For Legislative Reform, William P. Bivins Jr.

Akron Law Review

This article will attempt to identify some of the sources of the problems which are adversely affecting the system of products liability litigation and will offer proposals for reform within the framework of the law of products liability.

Products Liability: Toward Balancing The Scales, Donald M. Jenkins

Akron Law Review

The evolution and application of products liability law continues to be one of the most dynamic developments in the law. This issue of the Akron Law Review is dedicated to presenting and exploring recent significant developments.

Strict Liability And Economic Harm In Ohio, Edward J. Howlett Ii

Akron Law Review

In Temple v. Wean United, Inc., the Ohio Supreme Court formally adopted section 402 (A) of the Restatement (Second) of Torts, thus recognizing in Ohio the Restatement's strict liability cause of action for injury caused by defectively manufactured products. Although the Restatement clearly states that recovery may be had in strict liability for personal injury and for property damage, there is debate over whether "economic loss" should be recoverable under the doctrine of strict liability. This comment will review existing case law to determine whether economic loss may be recovered from the manufacturer of a defective product under a …

Presumptions And Modal Logic: A Hohfeldian Approach, John P. Finan

Akron Law Review

The difficulty of distinguishing between an inference and a presumption, a difficulty that bedevils tort and evidence teachers, (see Appendix I) among others, may be dispelled by a study of the deontic nature of permissible inferences and presumptions. Using scholastic terminology, an inference is a function of the intellect, not the will. Therefore, deontic notions of permission and duty seem foreign to inference. However, deontic notions are legitimate, because the law, in assigning a fact finding function to judge and jury, uses deontic notions in assigning fact finding competence. Thus, the statement that an inference is not permissible means that …

Book Review: Lawsuit: By Stuart M. Speiser, Lawrence P. Wilkins

Akron Law Review

The seven ages of a lawsuit are portrayed in new light through the lively prose of Mr. Speiser, as he tells the backstage stories in seven major tort cases in which he or members of his firm have participated during his distinguished career. More than just chronicled events observable by anyone, the author's stories reveal some of the thinking processes which turn the seven ages of a lawsuit into working tools in the resolution of controversies. More than just another collection of "stories-about-cases-the-author-has-won," the book is a discourse on the author's thesis that the American "trinity of torts" (jury trial, …

Liability Of Liquor Vendors For Injuries To Intoxicated Persons, Kemock V. Mark Ii, Elinore Marsh

Akron Law Review

In an opinion anticipating, in part, the advent of the comparative negligence standard in Ohio, Kemock v. Mark II extends common law liability to include liquor vendors who serve already intoxicated patrons who injure themselves and whose injury is the proximate result of continued alcohol consumption. Relying upon an earlier Ohio Supreme Court decision and a California Supreme Court case, the Court of Appeals of Ohio recognizes liability for vendor negligence which damages the drinker. The test for recovery is one not previously applied in cases of this sort in Ohio; one which measures liability by balancing degrees of each …

The Case Against Strict Liability Protection For New Home Buyers In Ohio, Karen Doty

Akron Law Review

In Ohio, home buyers have several means available to protect their investment and assure themselves of getting their money's worth. First, and foremost, the Ohio courts, while not mandating either implied warranties of habitability or strict liability, have offered some protection to the consumer in holding builders to a standard of workmanship commensurate with that prevailing in the trade locally. Ohio courts also recognize collateral covenants with regard to construction that do not merge with the deed when title is transferred.

Comparative Negligence In Ohio: Prospective Or Retrospective Application, Beth Whitmore

Akron Law Review

Under Revised Code § 2315.19, the contributory negligence of the plaintiff is no longer an absolute bar to recovery. Only where a plaintiff's fault is greater than that of all defendants combined is that plaintiff precluded entirely from recovery. Thus under the new Ohio statute, the possibility of recovery for the negligent plaintiff is significantly enhanced while at the same time liability exposure of the defendant is proportionately enlarged. It is therefore of critical importance to determine whether such an alteration in the relative rights of litigants is constitutional.

Ohio Supreme Court Symposium

Akron Law Review

During the 1981-1982 term the Ohio Supreme Court rendered 250 written opinions on a wide range of topics from wiretapping to the liability of landlords for injuries. In several cases, individuals gained significant legal rights in dealing with business and others. In addition, there were some significant changes in the law governing municipal sovereignty and immunity. This symposium will not attempt to cover all decisions of the Ohio Supreme Court, but rather to highlight some of the major decisions which affect Ohioans.

Torts In Sports - "I'Ll See You In Court!", John F. Carrol

Akron Law Review

This comment analyzes violence in the major professional sports of football, hockey, basketball, and baseball and the inability of the internal control systems of the various sports leagues to adequately control incidents of excessive violence. Judicial redress should be available for injuries resulting from acts committed outside of the rules of the game. The possible theories of recovery and applicable defenses to liability will be analyzed. Criminal liability also will be considered along with recently proposed congressional bills which advocate civil and criminal penalties for excessively violent acts in professional sports.

Sovereign Immunity For Political Subdivisions, Kathy Sue Magoline

Akron Law Review

The Ohio Supreme Court continued in 1983 to expand and define its abrogation of the doctrine of sovereign immunity for municipal corporations and political subdivisions. The court's decisions in this area have resulted in a significant increase in tort liability for local governments and school districts, who may now be found liable for tortious acts in the same manner as private individuals.

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 …

Administering Ohio's Newly Recognized Tort: The Negligent Infliction Of Serious Emotional Distress, Dan A. Morrell Jr.

Akron Law Review

Before examining the standards set forth by the Ohio Supreme Court in Paugh v. Hanks, a brief overview of the history and treatment of emotional distress in other jurisdictions is necessary because Ohio has borrowed from the experiences and illustrations of several states in delineating the standards for administration of this new tort.

The Landlord's Liability To His Tenants For Injuries Criminally Inflicted By Third Persons, Marvin M. Moore

Akron Law Review

Until approximately fifteen years ago a landlord was never held civilly liable to his tenants for injuries inflicted by the criminal acts of third persons, regardless of the deficiency of the security measures provided by the landlord.' The landlord was protected from tenant lawsuits by three factors: The historical concept of a lease, certain tort theories of a legalistic nature, and some policy concerns having significant influence upon the courts. In recent years the courts have begun holding landlords liable in some circumstances for criminally-induced injuries sustained by their tenants. The following discussion will examine the reasons for the landlord's …

Workers' Compensation In Ohio: Scope Of Employment And The Intentional Tort, Donald P. Wiley

Akron Law Review

The purpose of this comment is to discuss the issues and developments in the intentional tort area. Although analogies are drawn from developments in other jurisdictions, the primary focus will be on Ohio decisions. As will be demonstrated, Ohio courts are now being faced with the following question: Is an employer protected from common law damages no matter how his employee is injured, or should he be "punished" by a common law action when he intentionally injures his employee? Within this query are many others: What is an intentional injury? Can the employee recover workman's compensation and common law damages …

Parent-Child Tort Immunity Law In Ohio, Jeffrey L. Hall

Akron Law Review

In light of the abrupt change in Ohio concerning the parental immunity doctrine, this comment will examine the historical justifications for the doctrine, with an extended discussion of the Ohio experience with the immunity prior to its change in Kirchner. This comment also analyzes the present Ohio position, contrasting it with the approaches of other states, and cautions against the increasing use of family exclusion clauses in liability insurance policies which have the practical effect of retaining the immunity where the court has abrogated it.

The Liabilty Of Social Hosts For Their Intoxicated Guests' Automobile Accidents - An Extension Of The Law, Elizabeth A. Levin

Akron Law Review

This comment will first address the historical trend leading to the liability of social hosts. It will then address the three ways an injured victim might allege a cause of action, and will discuss the problems and implications of holdings of liability of each theory.

Imposing Punitive Damage Liabiliity On The Intoxicated Driver, Martin A. Kotler

Akron Law Review

It is important to keep in mind throughout this discussion that awareness and acknowledgement of the existence of a problem, even a very serious problem, should not make us overreact and thereby accept an unworkable solution in our zeal to do something. The imposition of punitive damages is, for the most part, just such an unworkable solution. More specifically, I will attempt to demonstrate that, with the possible exception of the case of the recidivist, non-alcoholic defendant, the imposition of punitive damages simply cannot be justified. That being the case, we must look elsewhere for a solution to an admittedly …

Issues Complicating Rights Of Spouses, Parents, And Children To Sue For Wrongful Death, Dale Katzenmeyer

Akron Law Review

There are two types of wrongful death statutes, the personal representative type, and the beneficiary type. With the personal representative type, the action is brought by the personal representative of the deceased on behalf of all persons statutorily eligible to benefit from the action. In the beneficiary type of statute, the statutorily authorized beneficiaries are joined together and bring the action in their own names.

Irrespective of the type of statute, the statutes seem to name clearly the persons who are acceptable beneficiaries. These beneficiaries, at a minimum, include spouses, parents and children. The difficult issues arise when the plaintiff …

Uninsured Motorist Insurance Now Covers Punitive Award - Hutchinson V. J.C. Penny Casualty Insurance Company, Dale Katzenmeyer

Akron Law Review

A split of authority exists among the few states which have decided the issue In jurisdictions permitting recovery of punitive damages, uninsured motorist coverage is intended to place the insurer in the shoes of the uninsured tortfeasor. Since the insurer stands in the shoes of the tortfeasor, and since punitive damages could be covered if the tortfeasor had his own insurance, it is illogical to deny the victim punitive damages simply because the tortfeasor is uninsured. Other jurisdictions believe that punitive damages should not be awarded since that award would not operate to punish the tortfeasor and would therefore violate …

Product Liability - Can It Kick The Smoking Habit?, William Kepko

Akron Law Review

This comment, divided into two major sections, will review the reasons for past inability to collect damages from the tobacco industry and explore possible theories of recovery that may be advanced in the new round of pending litigation.

A New Private Action In Products Liability: Swenson V. Emerson Electric Co., Stephen Griffin

Akron Law Review

By the late 1960's, statistics revealed that a total of twenty million people were injured or killed annually in consumer product-related accidents. Congress reacted by establishing a committee to investigate the adequacy of consumer protection against unreasonable risks caused by hazardous household products. This committee concluded that producers of hazardous products are in the best position to safeguard consumers against injury, but found that many producers lacked motivation to engage in meaningful self-regulation. Consequently, they recommended the creation of a federal regulatory agency.

Congress responded by enacting the Consumer Product Safety Act (CPSA), and by establishing the Consumer Product Safety …

Prince V. St. Francis-St. George Hospital, Inc., Michael Christie

Akron Law Review

This note considers the possible impact on Ohio law of the Prince holding. A review of Ohio's prior position on invasion of privacy suggests that the holding of Prince represents a substantial departure from past decisions in two respects: first, the plaintiffs alleged that their privacy was invaded when information was communicated to only one other person, and second, the invasion of the privacy of one spouse served as the basis for a claim of the other spouse. This apparent departure of Prince from prior decisions is discussed in the context of a physician's duty of confidentiality and defendant's breach …

Is Medical Thermography A Reliable Tool In Diagnosing Soft Tissue Injuries In Personal Injury Cases?, Gary L. Evans

Akron Law Review

Behind the mundane, albeit pressing and important questions as to whether and to what extent a thermographic exam changes the value of a case, there lurks a more basic issue; is thermography a legally and medically reliable tool in diagnosing soft tissue injuries? This article will examine that issue as it pertains to personal injury litigation and reach some qualified conclusions.

Part I discusses thermography in general and describes electronic and liquid crystal thermography in particular. Part II divides reliability into two categories in an attempt to distinguish between medical and legal reliability. Part III discusses possible impacts caused by …

Falwell V. Flynt: Lampooning Or Liability; The Realization Of A Three-Pronged Tort Approach For Establishing Media Liability For Fictional Defamation, Christopher C. Patterson

Akron Law Review

This article will discuss the appellate court's interpretation and application of the three tort theories of liability. It will also analyze the potential floodgate effect this case may have on future defamation actions against the media for publishing fictional publications, including political cartoons.

Welsh V. United States, The Sixth Circuit Gives A Physics Lesson - For Every Action There Is An Equal And Opposite Reaction, Daniel L. Bell

Akron Law Review

This casenote will review the facts of Welsh v. United States and present the current judicial approaches to spoliation of evidence in civil litigation. Second, the note will analyze the Welsh court's proposed solution to the spoliation problem. Finally, the note will discuss the use of the Welsh approach in litigation and management implications for health care facilities.

Eastern Airlines V. Floyd: Airline Passengers Denied Recovery For Emotional Distress Under The Warsaw Convention, Lisa M. Fromm

Akron Law Review

This Note reviews prior district court and appellate court decisions regarding the translation and scope of "bodily injury." Next, the Note discusses the Court's analysis in Floyd, including the arguments for and against allowing recovery for emotional distress under the Warsaw Convention. Finally, the Note examines the ramifications of the Floyd Court's interpretation and the uncertainties which remain in this area of the law.

Cipollone V. Liggett Group, Inc.: A Preemptive Lucky Strike?, Christopher J. Gagin

Akron Law Review

The gravamen of this casenote will focus on the Court's preemption analysis. Included in this examination will be the legislative and economic forces underlying the Court's conclusion that the 1965 Federal Cigarette Labeling and Advertising Act does not preempt all state common law tort actions against cigarette manufacturers.

Tortious Necessity; The Privileged Defense, John P. Finan, John Ritson

Akron Law Review

The similarities between the laws of torts in the United States of America and England enable one to make an interesting comparison between the two sets of rules applicable to the general defense of necessity. Although both tort systems are derivatives to a greater or lesser extent of the English common law, they have inevitably developed their own individual jurisprudence over the years. Concepts have been refined and extended to produce significant and curious differences which provide an interesting exercise in legal forensic. The similarities of the two tort systems make a comparative study possible, and the differences provide the …

Jenkins V. James B. Day & Co.: A New Defense Of State Tort Law Against Federal Preemption - Is It Legitimate?, Richard J. Scislowski

Akron Law Review

This Note will recount the general law of federal preemption and its recent developments. Next, it will describe the Jenkins case, the facts leading to the litigation, the prior procedure in the lower courts, and the Ohio Supreme Court's reasoning in the opinion. Lastly, this Note will critically evaluate the court's new argument supporting the preservation of state tort claims in light of familiar principles of statutory construction.