Category Archives: Civil Recourse

D Theodore Rave, ‘Tort Claims As Property Rights’

ABSTRACT Courts have long said that legal claims are a constitutionally protected form of property. But what does that mean? This essay explores the treatment of legal claims as property rights in the context of mass torts in doctrinal, theoretical, and economic terms. Corrective justice and civil recourse conceptions of tort law dictate that tort […]

Nicholas McBride, Review of Goldberg and Zipursky, Recognizing Wrongs

Goldberg, John CP and Zipursky, Benjamin C, Recognizing Wrongs, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2020, 380 pp, hb £36.95. In the Preface to the first edition of his Unjust Enrichment (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 2003), Peter Birks observed that the book represented such a dramatic volte face that ‘Almost everything of mine now needs calling back […]

Just Published: Goldberg and Zipursky, Recognizing Wrongs

Two preeminent legal scholars explain what tort law is all about and why it matters, and describe their own view of tort’s philosophical basis: civil recourse theory. Tort law is badly misunderstood. In the popular imagination, it is ‘Robin Hood’ law. Law professors, meanwhile, mostly dismiss it as an archaic, inefficient way to compensate victims […]

Ahson Azmat, ‘Tort’s Indifference: Conformity, Compliance, and Civil Recourse’

ABSTRACT Leading accounts of tort law split cleanly into two seams. Some trace its foundations to a deontic form of morality; others to an instrumental, policy-oriented system of efficient loss allocation. An increasingly prominent alternative to both seams, Civil Recourse Theory (CRT) resists this binary by arguing that tort comprises a basic legal category, and […]

Ahson Azmat, ‘Tort’s Indifference: Conformity, Compliance, and Civil Recourse’

ABSTRACT Leading accounts of tort law split cleanly into two seams. Some trace its foundations to a deontic form of morality; others to an instrumental, policy-oriented system of efficient loss allocation. An increasingly prominent alternative to both seams, Civil Recourse Theory (CRT) resists this binary by arguing that tort comprises a basic legal category, and […]

Matthew Shapiro, ‘Civil Wrongs and Civil Procedure’

ABSTRACT Civil wrongs are conventionally redressed through civil litigation, which, in turn, is constituted and governed by ‘transsubstantive’ rules of civil procedure. What place, if any, should the general processes of civil litigation and rules of civil procedure have in a theory of private law organized around the concept of civil wrongs? In answering that […]

Nathan Oman, ‘John Calvin’s Quarrel with Civil Recourse Theory’

ABSTRACT This essay traces in skeletal form a history of the Christian critique of litigation, with a focus on the well-articulated argument of the Reformation theologian John Calvin. Most of contemporary private law theory focuses on the idea of liability. For law and economics liability is a price placed on certain conduct in order to […]

Ahson Azmat, ‘Joint-Carving in Deontic Tort’

Abstract Many legal theorists refuse to reduce the rules, rights, and wrongs of tort into the policy-based prices, sanctions, and tolls of Holmesian instrumentalism. This refusal is not merely an interpretive position within tort law, or private law more generally. Properly construed, deontic views of tort amount to some form of metaethical non-naturalism. And while […]

Ahson Azmat, ‘The Grounds of Tort, Part I: Private Wrongs and Practical Reasoning’

Abstract Tort theory is widely thought to split cleanly into two seams. Some trace tort’s foundations to a deontic form of morality; others to an instrumental, policy-oriented system of loss allocation. Civil Recourse Theory (CRT) resists this binary. It argues that torts comprise a basic legal category, and that this category constitutes an autonomous domain […]

‘Expressivism, Corrective Justice, and Civil Recourse’

Scott Hershovitz, Treating Wrongs as Wrongs: An Expressive Argument for Tort Law, 10 Journal of Tort Law 1 (2017), available at SSRN. With clear examples, incisive and sweeping philosophical argumentation, and an engaging prosaic lilt, Scott Hershovitz writes about tort law the way his mentor Ronald Dworkin wrote about constitutional law. If this sounds like […]