Torts Commons^™

Aiming At The Wrong Target: The "Audience Targeting" Test For Personal Jurisdiction In Internet Defamation Cases, Sarah H. Ludington

Faculty Scholarship

In Young v. New Haven Advocate, 315 F.3d 256 (4th Cir. 2002), the Fourth Circuit crafted a jurisdictional test for Internet defamation that requires the plaintiff to show that the defendant specifically targeted an audience in the forum state for the state to exercise jurisdiction. This test relies on the presumption that the Internet — which is accessible everywhere — is targeted nowhere; it strongly protects foreign libel defendants who have published on the Internet from being sued outside of their home states. Other courts, including the North Carolina Court of Appeals, have since adopted or applied the test. The …

Further Perspectives On Corporate Wrongdoing, In Pari Delicto, And Auditor Malpractice, Deborah A. Demott

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Can Wrongful Death Damages Recovered By A Married Person Be Separate Property Under California Law?, William A. Reppy Jr.

Faculty Scholarship

Existing California judicial precedent uniformly holds that damages recovered by a married person based on the wrongful death of a relative of the married person during the marriage—and while the spouses were not living separate and apart—is entirely community property. Under the theoretical basis for this community property classification, it is irrelevant that the person tortiously killed was a child or grandchild only of the plaintiff- or payee-spouse and had no legally recognized relationship to that party’s husband or wife, who becomes owner of half the recovery because of its classification as community property. This Article rejects this community property …

Brief Of Professors Of Law As Amici Curiae In Support Of Appellants, Neil Vidmar, David Zevan

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Freedom Of Expression And Its Competitors, George C. Christie

Faculty Scholarship

The recognition of an increasing number of basic human rights, such as in the European Convention on Human Rights, has had the paradoxical effect of requiring courts in the common-law world to consider whether the extensive protection given by the common law to expression that was not false or misleading must be modified to accommodate these newly recognized basic rights. The most important of these newly recognized rights is the right of privacy, although expression has other competitors as well, such as what might be called a right to be spared the emotional trauma caused by abusive language. This article …

Civil Recourse, Damages-As-Redress, And Constitutional Torts, Michael L. Wells

Georgia Law Review

Modern tort theory is dominated by the principle of loss
allocation, which uses liability and damages as
instruments for assigning losses to deter unwanted
behavior and to compensate the plaintiff. Under loss
allocation, the central principle of damages is to make the
plaintiff whole through 'full" compensation. Recently, as
an alternative to loss allocation,Professors John Goldberg
and Benjamin Zipursky have advanced a civil recourse
theory of damages. In contrast to loss allocation, civil
recourse focuses tort law on empowering plaintiffs to seek
redress by evaluating damages through the lens of 'fair"
compensation. Goldberg and Zipursky's work is especially
timely because, …

Palsgraf, Punitive Damages, And Preemption, Benjamin C. Zipursky

Faculty Scholarship

This Article utilizes civil recourse theory along with a pragmatic conceptualist methodology to solve three problems in tort law: one on Palsgraf v. Long Island Railroad Co., one on punitive damages (as seen in the Supreme Court’s struggles with Philip Morris v. Williams), and one on federal preemption (as seen in the Supreme Court’s 4-4 deadlock in Warner-Lambert Company v. Kent). Confusion has been generated by a failure to recognize that -- despite the many aspects of tort law that render it importantly public -- there is something distinctively private about the common law of torts. When one firmly rejects …

Rethinking The New Public Health, Lindsay Wiley

Scholarly Articles in Law Reviews & Journals

This Article contributes to an emerging theoretical debate over the legitimate scope of public health law by linking it to a particular doctrinal debate in public nuisance law. State and local governments have been largely stymied in their efforts to use public nuisance litigation against harmful industries to vindicate collectively-held, common law rights to non-interference with public health and safety. The ways in which this litigation has failed are instructive for a broader movement in public health that is only just beginning to take shape. In response to evolving scientific understanding about the determinants of health, public health advocates are …

One Work, Three Infringers: Calculating The Correct Number Of Separate Awards Of Statutory Damages In A Copyright Infringement Action, Timothy L. Warnock

Vanderbilt Journal of Entertainment & Technology Law

Columbia Pictures provides the most persuasive analysis of the correct number of separate awards of statutory damages available to a plaintiff. Lime Group recognized that the question was a particularly close one, and the court erred in reaching the opposite result from Columbia Pictures. The Lime Group analysis is based on a fundamentally flawed earlier decision and relies, in the end, on an approach as likely to reward infringers rather than defend the rights of copyright holders: determining whether the potential result in any given case is absurd. Regarding the hypothetical case provided at the beginning of this Essay, Warren …

An Economic Perspective On Preemption, Keith N. Hylton

Faculty Scholarship

This Essay has two goals. The first is to present an economic theory of preemption as a choice among regulatory regimes. The optimal regime choice model is used to generate specific implications for the court decisions on preemption of products liability claims. The second objective is to extrapolate from the regime choice model to consider its implications for broader controversies about preemption.

Rescuing The Dignitary Torts From The Constitution, Cristina Carmody Tilley

Faculty Publications

The rights of individuals to recover for dignitary torts has been withering for the past forty years, since the Supreme Court constitutionalized the state common law tort of defamation in New York Times v. Sullivan in 1964. The Court announced in that case that the First Amendment required it to impose high standards for individual defamation claims in order to protect robust speech. As that principle has taken hold, it has in effect squeezed the rights of individuals to recover for invasion of privacy and intentional infliction of emotional distress as well as defamation. Just last Term, the Court held …

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.

Reining In The Rogue Squadron: Making Sense Of The "Original Source" Exception For Qui Tam Relators, Dayna Bowen Matthew

Publications

The qui tam provision of the Civil False Claims Act effectively serves to expand the government’s capacity to combat fraud, but also invites abusive prosecution against blameless public contractors. Although the public disclosure jurisdictional bar is designed to permit worthy claimants to proceed as whistle blowers while precluding parasitic opportunists from unfairly imposing litigation costs and reaping undeserved awards, the inconsistent judicial interpretation of the original source exception threatens predictable and just law enforcement. Christopher Alexion’s note categorizes the approaches courts have taken as ranging from permissive, to “middle ground” to restrictive based on the timing of the relator’s disclosure, …

Summary Of Munda V. Summerlin Life & Health Ins. Co., 127 Nev. Adv. Op. No. 83, Joseph Bowen

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

An appeal from a district court order granting a motion to dismiss in a tort action.

Tnuva Central Cooperative V. Raabi Estate, Esther Hayut, Isaac Amit, Uzi Vogelman

Translated Opinions

[This abstract is not part of the Court's opinion and is provided for the reader's convenience. It has been translated from a Hebrew version prepared by Nevo Press Ltd. and is used with its kind permission.]

An appeal and cross appeal challenging the decision of the Tel Aviv District Court (Partial Judgment and Supplementary Judgment,) where the court partially granted a consumer class action suit, which was granted leave to be submitted in CC 10085/080 (hereinafter: Tnuva). The class action suit revolved around the misleading of the consumer public and the production of a milk product in violation of binding …

Medical Malpractice: The Italian Experience, Claudia Dimarzo

Chicago-Kent Law Review

Beginning with an investigation into the problematic nature of medical liability, the Article overviews the most significant approaches taken by courts and scholars in order to establish whether the physician's position before the patient is comparable with that of either a tortfeasor or a contractor.

Having explained that the most recent approaches in this regard tend toward the recognition of the contractual nature of medical liability, the Author discusses the implications of such a solution, making specific reference to the following issues: 1) the assignment of the burden of proof (along with the distinction between obligations of means and obligations …

The Law Of Medical Misadventure In Japan, Robert B. Leflar

Chicago-Kent Law Review

This paper offers a comprehensive overview of Japanese law and practice relating to iatrogenic (medically-caused) injury, with comparisons to other nations' medical law systems. The paper addresses criminal sanctions for Japanese physicians' negligent and illegal acts; civil law principles of substantive law and related issues of procedure, practice, and liability insurance; and administrative measures including health ministry programs aimed at expanding and improving the quality of peer review within Japanese medicine, and a recently implemented no-fault compensation system for birth-related injuries.

Among the paper's findings are these. Criminal and civil actions increased rapidly after highly publicized medical error events at …

Medical Malpractice And Compensation In The Uk, Richard Goldberg

Chicago-Kent Law Review

In the first part of this paper, Dr. Goldberg examines the context in which medical malpractice liability is operating in the UK. The fact that the state-run National Health Service (NHS) is the major healthcare provider in the UK has several implications, since funding for medical malpractice compensation in the NHS comes from the taxpayer. The most recent empirical evidence on the incidence and funding of claims in England and Scotland is assessed, to show a trend of expenditure on clinical negligence increasing, particularly in England. This is followed by an examination of the statutory framework for the empowerment of …

Medical Malpractice And Compensation In Global Perspective: How Does The U.S. Do It?, David A. Hyman, Charles Silver

Chicago-Kent Law Review

This article describes the problem of health care error in the United States of America and the various regulatory, liability, and compensation systems that deal with medical mistakes. In terms of frequency, direct costs, and aggregate social costs, the problem of medical errors is staggering. Millions of patients are killed or injured every year. A large percentage of adverse events could be avoided by the use of reasonable care. Regulators have not dealt with these problems effectively. Regulators specifically appointed to police the medical profession are often lax, whether because of capture, or from a sense of "there but for …

Worthy Of Their Name? Addressing Aquatic Nuisance Species With Common Law Public Nuisance Claims, Christopher Grubb

Chicago-Kent Law Review

Aquatic invasive species like the Asian carp and zebra mussel have caused grave ecological and economic harm across the United States, and frequently harm rights common to the public such as boating, fishing, and bathing. Yet, Congress' efforts to address the problem through legislation have been piecemeal and unsuccessful. Historically, the common law of public nuisance served as an important tool to remedy transboundary pollution. More recently, courts have established that such public nuisance claims will be displaced where Congress has comprehensively regulated in a field. This Note explores whether public nuisance claims involving aquatic invasive species should be displaced …