Monthly Archives: May, 2014

Alessandro Romano, ‘God’s Dice: The Law in a Probabilistic World’

Abstract: Despite the findings of natural scientists and philosophers, the law is still clinging on a deterministic concept of causation. Probabilistic considerations are not alien to the legal world, yet they are generally regarded as ad hoc exceptions to handle particularly complex cases. From this perspective, the need for a theoretical shift is advocated. Probabilistic […]

An Updated Database of State Tort Law Reforms (5th)

“Ronen Avraham (Texas) recently alerted me to an update of one of the more helpful resources around for those who study torts and tort reform. Specifically, the Database of State Tort Law Reforms (DSTLR 5th) seeks to create ‘one “canonized” dataset will increase our understanding of tort reform’s impacts on our lives’. A fuller (though […]

Jason Varuhas, ‘The Concept of “Vindication” in the Law of Torts: Rights, Interests and Damages’

Abstract: This article seeks to identify the nature of vindication as a distinctive function within the English law of torts. It argues that a specific conception of vindication explains fundamental features of the law of torts, variations in the structure of different torts, as well as variations in the approach to damages from one tort […]

Nils Jansen, ‘The Idea of Legal Responsibility’

Abstract: The article analyses and reconstructs a broad idea of legal responsibility which underlies and normatively links tort law with the law of unjustified enrichment. The article’s central proposition is that responsibility for damage caused and enrichment-responsibility are closely interrelated. Both aspects of obligations are equally an expression of corrective justice, and ultimately serve to […]

‘Free for the Taking (or Why Libertarians are Wrong about Markets for Privacy)’

Katherine J Strandburg, Free Fall: The Online Market’s Consumer Preference Disconnect, NYU School of Law, Public Law Research Paper No. 13–62 (2013); Chris Jay Hoofnagle and Jan Whittington, Free: Accounting for the Internet’s Most Popular Price, 61 UCLA Law Review 606 (2014). Have you heard any of these arguments lately? Consumers willingly pay for the […]

Stein and De Mot, ‘Talking Points’

Abstract: Our civil liability system affords numerous defenses against every single violation of the law. Against every single claim raised by the plaintiff, the defendant can assert two or more defenses each of which gives him an opportunity to win the case. As a result, when a court erroneously strikes out a meritorious defense, it […]

Kenneth Ching, ‘Beauty and Ugliness in Offer and Acceptance’

Abstract: This essay applies classical aesthetics to the contract doctrine of offer and acceptance. It argues that contract law can be understood, analyzed, and improved using three criteria of beauty: proportion, integrity, and clarity. Based on these criteria, this essay (1) argues that the traditional doctrine of offer and acceptance is beautiful, (2) argues that […]

Claudio Michelon, ‘Virtuous Circularity: Positive Law and Particular Justice’

Abstract: This paper argues that the positive allocative decisions paradigmatically carried out by the application of legal rules are a necessary condition for arguments about particular justice (ie, distributive and commutative justice) to make sense. If one shifts the focus from the distinction between distributive and commutative justice to what the two aspects of particular […]

Steven Shavell, ‘A General Rationale for a Governmental Role in the Relief of Large Risks’

Abstract: The government often provides relief against large risks, such as disasters. A simple, general rationale for this role of government is considered here that applies even when private contracting to share risks is not subject to market imperfections. Specifically, the optimal private sharing of risks will not result in complete coverage against them when […]

Farmer and Pecorino, ‘Liability Standards with an Uncertain Outcome at Trial’

Abstract: We model a negligence standard where the defendant’s level of care is viewed with error by the judicial system. All cases are assumed to settle prior to trial, but the negotiated outcome reflects the expected outcome at trial. The policymaker may or may not be able to induce the optimal level of care on […]