In their influential writings over the past twenty years and most recently in their article ‘The Strict Liability in Fault and the Fault in Strict Liability’, Professors Goldberg and Zipursky embrace the thesis that torts are conduct-based wrongs. A conduct-based wrong is one where an agent violates the right of another by failing to conform her conduct to the standard required by the law. As a description of negligence liability, the characterization of torts as conduct-based wrongs is both correct and illuminating. Negligence involves a failure to conduct oneself as a reasonable person would. It is fault in the deed, not fault in the doer. At least since Vaughan v. Menlove, it has been clear that a blameless injurer can conduct himself negligently and so be held liable … ” (more)
Gregory C Keating, ‘Is There Really No Liability Without Fault?: A Critique Of Goldberg and Zipursky’, Fordham Law Review Res Gestae volume 85:24 (2017).