Torts Commons^™

Hospitals Pay The Price: Sex Abuse Cover-Ups Accountable Under New York Adult Survivors Act, Olivia Cohen

Cardozo Journal of Equal Rights & Social Justice

The note argues that hospitals often fail to address sexual abuse, prioritizing their reputations over patient safety, and that the New York Adult Survivors Act (NYASA) provides a critical but insufficient avenue for accountability. While the NYASA allows survivors to sue abusers and enabling institutions, its one-year lookback window excludes many victims, emphasizing the need for expansion to ensure justice and institutional reform.

Artificial Intelligence And Its Exploitation By The Fashion Industry, Stephanie Solis-Kepes

Cardozo International & Comparative Law Review

The note explores the transformative impact of artificial intelligence (AI) on the fashion industry, highlighting its potential to enhance efficiency, innovation, and customer experience. However, it underscores the critical legal and ethical challenges, including data privacy, intellectual property rights, supply chain transparency, and diversity issues, that must be addressed to ensure responsible and equitable adoption of AI technologies.

Volume 48 Masthead, Seattle University Law Review

Seattle University Law Review

Volume 48 Masthead

Voting Matters: Materiality Considerations And The Shareholder Vote, Renee M. Jones

Seattle University Law Review

For the shareholder franchise to have meaning, shareholders must have access to relevant information to inform their voting decisions. The securities laws’ disclosure requirements play an essential role in informing the shareholder vote.

This Essay focuses on the question of the materiality of information in the context of shareholder voting. It addresses the question of whether ESG-related information is material, positioning the materiality inquiry within the context of shareholders’ voting decisions. It explores the definition of materiality with a focus on the “reasonable investor” concept embedded within the definition. The Essay argues that the implicit expectations of many commentators that …

Volume 48 Masthead, Seattle University Law Review

Seattle University Law Review

Volume 48 Masthead

Understanding The Big Three’S Wavering Support Of Environmental And Social Shareholder Proposals, Jeff Schwartz, Jefferson Jensen

Seattle University Law Review

Because of their substantial equity portfolios, BlackRock, Vanguard, and State Street (the Big 3) are central players in corporate governance. It is, therefore, critical to understand how they vote. One puzzle is that their support for shareholder proposals on environmental and social matters appears to waiver. In 2020, for instance, BlackRock supported 11.1% of environmental proposals at S&P 500 firms. In 2021, it seemingly reversed course, supporting 55.2%. It then flipped again, supporting 32.1% in 2022. Such statistics suggest that the Big 3 are constantly changing their views on these topics. This Article seeks to better understand whether this is …

Volume 48 Masthead, Seattle University Law Review

Seattle University Law Review

Volume 48 Masthead

Using Public Nuisance Litigation To Address Industrywide Misconduct: Common-Law Statutes, Nondelegation, And Regulation, Hillel Y. Levin, Timothy D. Lytton

Scholarly Works

In this Article, we assert that broad, open-ended public nuisance statutes offer a legitimate legal tool to curb public health harms caused by the unreasonable design, marketing, and distribution practices of product manufacturers. We argue that these statutes are "common-law statutes" by which legislatures authorize courts to apply the concept of public nuisance to new situations using common-law-style reasoning. We demonstrate that this understanding of public nuisance statutes is consistent with well-established interpretive traditions regarding the codification of common law. Statutory delegation of broad interpretive discretion to courts concerning the application of public nuisance law constitutes a legislative choice to …

Harmful Connections: How Tort Law Can Address Algorithmic Account Recommendation Harms And Protect Youth Social Media Users, Francesca Kennedy

American University Journal of Gender, Social Policy & the Law

In 2023, the United States Surgeon General published an advisory to bring an urgent public health issue affecting America’s youth to the nation’s attention. The urgent public health issue was the ongoing negative impact of social media on children and adolescents. The report revealed that ninety-five percent of youths aged thirteen to seventeen use social media. Exposure to harmful content poses a risk to their mental health, including body dissatisfaction, disordered eating, depression, and, in extreme cases, death. Their mental health is also harmed by predatory behaviors and interactions with malicious adults that target and exploit minors on internet platforms. …

The End(S) Of Bankruptcy Exceptionalism: Purdue Pharma And The Problem Of Social Debt, Pamela Foohey, Jonathan C. Lipson

Scholarly Works

The Supreme Court’s recent 5-4 decision in the controversial chapter 11 bankruptcy reorganization of opioid-maker Purdue Pharma ends the use of nonconsensual third-party “releases,” which discharge (eliminate) liabilities of non-debtors who may share liability with a corporate debtor. Although the majority opinion is correct that the Bankruptcy Code does not permit this, it failed to recognize the problematic exceptionalism of the lower courts which approved those releases or the “social” qualities of Purdue Pharma’s mass tort liability.

Bankruptcy exceptionalism has been a contested concept since it emerged over fifteen years ago, and reflects a willingness to bend the rule of …

Policy And Poppycock In Proximate Cause Cases A/K/A Scope Of Liability And Starting To Make Sense, Thomas Galligan

FIU Law Review

Studying proximate cause is like trying to decode mumbo jumbo. Courts continue to use words like direct, remote, natural and probable, foreseeable, hindsight, and intervening and superseding causes, and they make them sound like tests. They make them sound like law. Furthermore, as one test is debunked and another appears, courts continue to apply the debunked tests. They just pile on a new one as well. Then, they calm themselves and say that proximate cause is all a matter of policy. After all, Leon Green said that; William Prosser said that. It must be true. But courts fail to ever …

What Is Deeply Rooted In The Constitution?, Thomas P. Crocker

BYU Law Review

In a series of cases stretching over a century, the Court made a right’s roots a constitutive feature of its identity. Highlighting the analytic centrality of deep roots to the recognition of rights, Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health withdrew prior judicial recognition of a woman’s right to reproductive choice, arguing that such a right was not properly rooted in the American legal tradition. But what does it mean for a right to have deep roots? A surprising feature of American constitutionalism is that there is no single answer to the basic analytic question of what it means for a right …

New York Times V. Sullivan: A Civil Rights Story, Samantha Barbas

Texas A&M Law Review

The 1964 Supreme Court decision in New York Times v. Sullivan established the “actual malice” rule in libel law, requiring that in order to win a libel suit, a public official must show that a defamatory statement was false and that the speaker made the statement knowing that it was false or “with reckless disregard of whether it was false or not.”

Sullivan involved a libel suit brought by segregationist Alabama officials against the New York Times (“Times”) and leaders of the civil rights movement. Sullivan arose from sectional battles over civil rights and integration in the 1960s. An all-white …

Assembling Pieces Of Accountability For The Srebrenica Genocide, Annick Pijnenburg, Nataša Nedeski

Genocide Studies and Prevention: An International Journal

The Srebrenica genocide has been the subject of multiple legal proceedings against various actors before different courts, at both the national and international level. Amongst others, the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia has sentenced various individual perpetrators, the International Court of Justice has ruled on the responsibility of the Serbian state, and Dutch courts have been asked to rule on the liability of the Dutch state and the United Nations. This raises the following question: to what extent have multiple adjudicatory mechanisms across legal regimes managed to deliver accountability for the Srebrenica genocide and what are the remaining …

The Private Cause Of Action Under Maine's Unfair Trade Practices Act, Steven A. Shaw

Maine Law Review

In 1970 the Maine Legislature passed the Unfair Trade Practices Act (UTPA) which declared unlawful any "unfair methods of competition and unfair or deceptive acts or practices in the conduct of any trade or commerce . . . ." UTPA-type statutes, now common to all states, offer several advantages. The statutes provide for a statutory award of attorneys' fees, create a private cause of action which is simple in comparison to analogous common law claims, and offer a flexible concept of unlawful conduct which many courts have shown a willingness to interpret broadly and sympathetically. Although Maine's UTPA was originally …

Hospital Accountability In Health Care Delivery, C. Elisabeth Belmont

Maine Law Review

In recent years, the role of community hospitals in health care delivery has undergone a dramatic change. Until the latter half of the twentieth century, a hospital was merely a "doctor's workshop," providing physicians with the physical facilities, equipment, and personnel necessary to treat their private patients. Due to progressive medical technology, today's hospital has moved from a passive role in patient care to more active participation in the delivery of total health care. The hospital has become a health care provider in its own right, furnishing a broad range of diagnostic and outpatient services, home care assistance, and specialized …

The Decline Of The Privity Rule In The Maine Law Of Tort Products Liability: A Conceptual History, Dennis M. Patterson

Maine Law Review

No single issue has more preoccupied modern jurisprudential writers than the limitations of precedent on the lawmaking power of judges. Yet despite this singular concentration, no scholarly consensus has emerged regarding what those limitations are or what form they should take. This continuing theoretical dispute recently manifested itself in a series of decisions rendered by the Law Court. Last spring in the case of Adams v. Buffalo Forge Co., the Law Court reconsidered a significant aspect of two decisions of the previous term: Burke v. Hamilton Beach Division and Hurd v. Hurd. In Burke and Hurd the court decided that …

The Vitality Of The Doctrine Of Punitive Damages In Maine, Kevin F. Gordon

Maine Law Review

On four separate occasions between December 1981 and February 1982, the Maine Supreme Judicial Court called into question the continued vitality of the common law doctrine of punitive damages. The substantive propriety of punitive damages was not challenged by any of the defendants in those four cases. As a result, the Law Court assumed for the purposes of each opinion that punitive damages could be awarded by a court "in some instances without explicit statutory authorization." Nevertheless, in a footnote to Braley v. Berkshire Mutual Insurance Co., the court challenged this assumption. Noting that the doctrine of punitive damages initially …

Who Should Recover For Loss Of Consortium?, Martin S. Amick

Maine Law Review

For more than three centuries courts have recognized a husband's right, where a tortious injury to his wife detrimentally affects the spousal relationship, to recover damages for loss of consortium. For many years the prevailing view was that a wife had no corresponding right to bring a similar action in response to a tortious injury to her husband. Most jurisdictions, however, now allow both the husband and the wife to recover for loss of "spousal" consortium. The right to recover for loss of consortium was extended to the wife largely because modern courts recognized that it was inconsistent and unjustifiably …

Common Law Sovereign Immunity And The Maine Tort Claims Act: A Rose By Another Name, R. Michael Martin

Maine Law Review

On October 12, 1976, the Maine Supreme Judicial Court allowed a Bath homeowner to sue the city for damage to her property resulting from the city's negligence. The case was Davies v. City of Bath and its significance was twofold. First, for decades before the Davies decision the Maine Supreme Judicial Court had routinely refused to consider such suits because of the doctrine of sovereign immunity. Fifteen years before Davies the court had expressed dissatisfaction with the doctrine, but until 1976 had repeatedly refused to abrogate it. Second, the Davies decision was significant because the Maine Legislature, under the guiding …