Abstract

http://ssrn.com/abstract=1143571
 


 



Restating Restitution: The Restatement Process and its Critics


Doug Rendleman


Washington and Lee University - School of Law


Washington and Lee Law Review, Forthcoming
Washington & Lee Legal Studies Paper No. 2008-32

Abstract:     
This article uses controversies in drafting sections of the Restatement (Third) of Restitution and Unjust Enrichment to examine the rigor of the American Law Institute's internal process. The sections I review stem from the Slayer Rule that prevents a killer from inheriting from his victim and Marvin v. Marvin's restitution for an unmarried cohabitant. I maintain that the disputes within the ALI reveal a searching and demanding process that leads to consensus doctrine that is accurate and legitimate, yet not frozen in time.

The Washington and Lee Law Review will publish this article in a symposium that grew out of the Frances Lewis Law Center's Restitution Roundtable in December 2007. The article will undergo the review's editorial and cite checking process before publication.

Number of Pages in PDF File: 17

Accepted Paper Series


Download This Paper

Date posted: June 12, 2008  

Suggested Citation

Rendleman, Doug, Restating Restitution: The Restatement Process and its Critics. Washington and Lee Law Review, Forthcoming; Washington & Lee Legal Studies Paper No. 2008-32. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1143571

Contact Information

Doug Rendleman (Contact Author)
Washington and Lee University - School of Law ( email )
Lexington, VA 24450
United States
Feedback to SSRN


Paper statistics
Abstract Views: 621
Downloads: 108
Download Rank: 146,669

© 2014 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.  FAQ   Terms of Use   Privacy Policy   Copyright   Contact Us
This page was processed by apollo4 in 0.296 seconds