Category Archives: Civil Recourse

Anthony Sebok, ‘The Public Right and Wrongs: Tort Theory and the Problem of Public Nuisance’

ABSTRACT Tort theory over the past two decades has been characterized by a fruitful dialectic between two models. Instrumentalism, especially, in its deterrence mode, has been promoted by a wide coalition of scholars and jurists. In response, various critics of instrumentalism have argued for the autonomy of tort law, first under the umbrella of corrective […]

Calabresi and Smith, ‘On Tort Law’s Dualisms’

“We read with interest Professors John Goldberg and Benjamin Zipursky’s new book, Recognizing Wrongs; Professor Catherine Sharkey’s Book Review; and Goldberg and Zipursky’s Response. Their exchange demonstrates that the field of tort law is alive. But is it well? Goldberg and Zipursky (hereinafter GZ) and Sharkey put forward what are, at first glance, very different […]

Special Issue of Law and Philosophy: Goldberg and Zipursky’s Recognizing Wrongs

Morality and Institutional Detail in the Law of Torts: Reflections on Goldberg’s and Zipursky’s Recognizing Wrongs (Tom Dougherty and Johann Frick) The Circumstances of Civil Recourse (Rebecca Stone) The Law of Negligence, Blameworthy Action and the Relationality Thesis: A Dilemma for Goldberg and Zipursky’s Civil Recourse Theory of Tort Law (Veronica Rodriguez-Blanco) Are Tort Remedies […]

Louis Hensler, ‘Civil Reconciliation Tort Theory: Making Torts Private Again’

ABSTRACT This article is largely a reaction to civil recourse tort theory and an attempt to recapture a tort theory that is more thoroughly private. The competing civil recourse and corrective justice conceptions of tort law as private are near the heart of this article, hence its title. While corrective justice and civil recourse theories […]

Anthony Sebok, ‘The Public Right and Wrongs: Tort Theory and the Problem of Public Nuisance’

ABSTRACT Tort theory over the past two decades has been characterized by a fruitful dialectic between two models. Instrumentalism, especially, in its deterrence mode, has been promoted by a wide coalition of scholars and jurists. In response, various critics of instrumentalism have argued for the autonomy of tort law, first under the umbrella of corrective […]

Veronica Rodriguez-Blanco, ‘The Law of Negligence, Blameworthy Action and the Relationality Thesis: A Dilemma for Goldberg and Zipursky’s Civil Recourse Theory of Tort Law’

ABSTRACT In this paper, I discuss Goldberg and Zipursky’s Recognizing Wrongs and argue that there is a tension between their philosophy of action as applied to the law of negligence and the idea that the directive-based relationality thesis is central and, therefore, the action and conduct of the defendant should not be part of the […]

Dougherty and Frick, ‘Morality and Institutional Detail in the Law of Torts: Reflections on Goldberg’s and Zipursky’s Recognizing Wrongs

ABSTRACT In their brilliant and thought-provoking book Recognizing Wrongs, John Goldberg and Benjamin Zipursky offer a vindicatory interpretation of the law of torts. As part of this, they offer a justification for what they call the ‘principle of civil recourse’. This is the principle that ‘a person who enjoys a certain kind of legal right, […]

Rebecca Stone, ‘The Circumstances of Civil Recourse’

ABSTRACT What circumstances create the need for an institution that conforms to civil recourse theory? I consider polities that vary in the extent to which they instantiate justice and argue that only a moderately non-ideal polity has a need for such an institution. When a polity gets close to the ideal, the polity needs institutions […]

Allan Beever, ‘Recognizing One More Wrong’

INTRODUCTION Recognizing Wrongs is the latest instalment from the leading civil recourse theorists John Goldberg and Benjamin Zipursky. It is a defence of the theory of tort law that they have developed, together and apart, for more than two decades. Unlike their earlier book on tort, this instalment does not focus on tort doctrine. Instead, […]

‘Tort Law and Civil Recourse’

Recognizing Wrongs. By John CP Goldberg and Benjamin C Zipursky. Cambridge, MA: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press. 2020. Pp 380. $45. For decades, Professors John Goldberg and Benjamin Zipursky have been developing the thesis that the primary purpose of tort law is to implement the principle of civil recourse. In Recognizing Wrongs, they […]