Torts Commons^™

The Surprising Relevance Of Medical Malpractice Law, Michael D. Frakes

Faculty Scholarship

The academic community has largely reached a consensus that medical malpractice reform is unlikely to be a meaningful source of health-care cost containment. This Article suggests that it would be premature to conclude based on the evidence underlying this academic sentiment that physicians are universally insensitive to the parameters of medical malpractice law and that liability reform has no role to play in the health-care-costs debate. On the contrary, this Article demonstrates that the medical-liability system, under particular structures and conditions, may indeed have a meaningful connection to health-care spending patterns.

The shortcoming of the existing empirical literature that has …

Do Physicians Respond To Liability Standards?, Michael D. Frakes, Matthew Frank, Seth Seabury

Faculty Scholarship

In this paper, we explore the sensitivity in the clinical decisions of physicians to the standards of care expected of them under the law, drawing on the abandonment by states over time of rules holding physicians to standards determined by local customs and the contemporaneous adoption of national-standard rules. Using data on broad rates of surgical interventions at the county-by-year level from the Area Resource File, we find that local surgery rates converge towards national surgery rates upon the adoption of national-standard rules. Moreover, we find that these effects are more pronounced among rural counties.

When The Lawyer Screws Up: A Portrait Of Legal Malpractice Claims And Their Resolution, Herbert M. Kritzer, Neil Vidmar

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

The Uneasy And Often Unhelpful Interaction Of Tort Law And Constitutional Law In First Amendment Litigation, George C. Christie

Faculty Scholarship

There are increasing tensions between the First Amendment and the common law torts of intentional infliction of emotional distress, defamation, and privacy. This Article discusses the conflicting interactions among the three models that are competing for primacy as the tort law governing expressive activities evolves to accommodate the requirements of the First Amendment. At one extreme there is the model that expression containing information which has been lawfully obtained that contains neither intentional falsehoods nor incitements to immediate violence can only be sanctioned in narrowly defined exceptional circumstances, even if that expression involves matters that are universally regarded as being …

The Mdl Vortex Revisited, Thomas B. Metzloff

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Exemption From The Common Fate: Refuge For Individual Debtors Trapped By Structured Settlements, Factoring Companies, And The Bankruptcy Code In Georgia, Michael C. Sullivan

Georgia Law Review

While the number of tort filings has been increasing in recent decades, the number of trials resulting from these claims has been steadily declining. Instead of sacrificing time and resources in court, parties choose settlement, frequently in the form of a structured settlement where payments are dispersed over a period of time. These structured settlements provide much-needed security for tort victims, particularly those who unable to work and are especially vulnerable to losing their settlements. But what happens when these victims find that they have expenses that they cannot cover with their deferred payments? Many tort victims wind up facing …

Laissez Fair:The Case For Alternative Litigation Funding And Assignment Of Lawsuit Proceeds In Georgia, David T. Adams

Georgia Law Review

This Note discusses the value of alternative litigation funding (ALF) and the legal challenges affecting the ALF industry in Georgia. More specifically, it identifies a way to maximize ALF's benefits for plaintiffs with personal tort and employment discrimination claims. Tort victims who are rendered incapable of working, and employees who have lost jobs because of workplace discrimination or retaliation,face immediate financial burdens-they may be unable to afford food, housing, health care, transportation, and other necessities. This economic pressure often forces plaintiffs to settle quickly for less than the value of the harm inflicted. But ALF companies offer a workable solution …

Environmental Hedonism Or, Securing The Environment Through The Common Law, George P. Smith Ii, David M. Steenburg

Scholarly Articles

This Article investigates whether a right to environmental hedonism can be claimed and compensated for when the environment is degraded. Building upon the economic and mathematical uncertainties in assessing any claim for loss of enjoyment of the environment, the Article considers the evaluation of environmental harms ex post through use of restorative damages allowed under the Restatement (Second) of Torts - and concludes that because of the ambiguities in public policy for not only determining what is an appropriate case for an award of restorative damages but also evaluating the nature and the scope of environmental injuries, these damages are …

The Original Source Of The Cause Of Action In Federal Courts: The Example Of The Alien Tort Statute, Anthony J. Bellia Jr., Bradford R. Clark

Journal Articles

Judges and scholars have long debated the legitimacy and contours of federal common law causes of action — actions created neither by Congress nor by state law. The question of federal judicial power to recognize federal common law causes of action arises in a range of contexts in the field of federal courts, including with respect to whether federal courts may recognize an implied right of action for the violation of a constitutional or statutory provision that does not specifically create one. Recently, the power of federal courts to recognize federal common law causes of action has emerged as a …

Halliburton Ii: It All Depends On What Defendants Need To Show To Establish No Impact On Price, Merritt B. Fox

Faculty Scholarship

Rule 1Ob-5 private damages actions cannot proceed on a class basis unless the plaintiffs are entitled to the fraud-on-the-market presumption of reliance. In Halliburton II, the Supreme Court provides defendants with an opportunity, before class certification, to rebut the fraud-on-the-market presumption through evidece that the misstatement had no effect on the issuer's share price. It left unspecified, however, the standard by which the sufficiency of this evidence should be judged.

This Article explores the two most plausible approaches to setting this standard. One approach would be to impose the same statistical burden on defendants seeking to show there was …

Licensing Commercial Value: From Copyright To Trademarks And Back, Jane C. Ginsburg

Faculty Scholarship

Copyright and trademarks often overlap, particularly in visual characters. The same figure may qualify as a pictorial, graphic or sculptural work on the one hand, and as a registered (or at least used) trademark on the other. The two rights, though resting on distinct foundations, tend to be licensed together. Trademarks symbolize the goodwill of the producer, and are protected insofar as copying that symbol is likely to confuse consumers as to the source or approval of the goods or services in connection with which the mark is used. For famous marks, the dilution action grants a right against uses …

Summary Of Sadler V. Pacificare Of Nevada, Inc., 130 Nev. Adv. Op. 98, Hayley Miller

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The Court determined (1) when stating a claim for a negligence action in which medical monitoring is sought as a remedy, a plaintiff may satisfy the injury requirement by alleging that additional medical monitoring is reasonably required beyond the standard recommendations.

Guidelines And Best Practices For Large And Mass Tort Mdls (First Edition), Duke Law School Center For Judicial Studies

Bolch Judicial Institute Publications

Mass-tort MDLs dominate the federal civil docket, yet they present enormous challenges to transferee judges assigned to manage them. There is little official guidance and no rules specific to the management of mass-tort MDLs, often requiring the transferee judge to develop procedures out of whole cloth.

Beginning in 2013, the Bolch Judicial Institute (then the Center for Judicial Studies) sought to address this issue through a series of annual bench-bar conferences. From these conferences came the Guidelines and Best Practices for Large and Mass-Tort MDLs document, which is designed to help judges and legal practitioners understand and efficiently navigate complex …

The European Directive On Products Liability: The Promise Of Progress?, Lawrence C. Mann, Peter R. Rodrigues

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

Summary Of Nevada Ass’N. Servs. V. Eighth Jud. Dist., 130 Nev. Adv. Op. 94, Michael Valiente

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The voluntary payment doctrine provides an affirmative defense to a claim for the recovery of money that a plaintiff voluntarily paid. The duress/coercion exception to the voluntary payment doctrine requires the plaintiff show no reasonable alternative to payment existed. Additionally, the defense of property exception requires the plaintiff show an imminent risk of losing the property.

Torts, Phillip Comer Griffeth, Cash V. Morris

Mercer Law Review

This Article surveys recent developments in Georgia tort law between June 1, 2013 and May 31, 2014. During this survey period, the Georgia Supreme Court decided several cases of significance in the medical malpractice arena, and a seven-judge panel of the Georgia Court of Appeals was called upon to decide a slip-and-fall case. Some might argue that a few of these cases were victories for the plaintiff's bar. However, a close reading of the opinions reflects some well-reasoned and impressive legal arguments concerning the gross negligence and summary judgment standards applied by Georgia's appellate jurists. These opinions will be cited …

“Danger Is My Business”: The Right To Manufacture Unsafe Products, Richard C. Ausness

Law Faculty Scholarly Articles

While no one would dispute that safety is a desirable objective, it may not always be an absolute priority. Rather, in some cases, other societal interests such as personal autonomy, consumer choice, product cost, and performance may trump legitimate safety goals. This is reflected in some of the doctrines and defenses that have evolved to protect the producers of unsafe products against tort liability. Some of these doctrines, such as those determining liability for the producers of optional safety equipment, inherently dangerous products, products with obvious hazards, and prescription drugs and medical devices, are part of the law of products …

Should Neither Wind Nor Rain Nor Hurricane Keep Victims From Recovery? Examining The Tort And Insurance Systems’ Ability To Compensate Hurricane Victims, Kathleen A. Zink

Fordham Law Review

Large-scale natural disasters, such as hurricanes, wreak tremendous havoc, causing billions of dollars in damages.  Those who suffer serious damage may turn to their insurance providers or the tort system for compensation.  But, both the tort and insurance systems present serious limitations to a hurricane victim’s recovery.  This Note analyzes the goals and criticisms of these two systems to determine which compensates hurricane victims best.  In light of its analysis, this Note ultimately concludes that neither system satisfactorily compensates victims.  Yet, tort could play some role in hurricane-related damage.  Tort law could effectively deter negligent behavior by imposing liability on …

A Rare Case Of Conspiracy By Lawful Means, Pey Woan Lee

Research Collection Yong Pung How School Of Law

Conspiracy by lawful means is a well-known anomaly in the law of torts. The anomaly lies in the fact that the tort imposes liability on two or more persons acting in concert to pursue a course of conduct that is otherwise lawful when committed by a sole actor. Of course, it is a critical element of the tort that the conspirators must have acted with the predominant intention to cause harm to the victim, but it is well settled that malicious intent is not, by itself, a sufficient basis for founding liability. It would thus seem that it is the …

Brief For Respondent. United States V. Wong, 134 S.Ct. 2873 (2014) (No. 13-1074), 2014 Wl 5804278, Eric Schnapper, Tom Steenson, Beth Creighton, Michael Rose

Court Briefs

QUESTIONS PRESENTED

1. Is the six-month limit on filing suit under the Federal Tort Claims Act, 28 U.S.C. 2401(b), jurisdictional?

2. If the six-month limit for filing suit under the Federal Tort Claims Act, 28 U.S.C. 2401(b), is not jurisdictional, is it subject to equitable tolling?