|
||||
|
||||
The Pervasive Role of Uncertainty in Tort Law: Rights and RemediesRobert L. RabinStanford Law School October 18, 2010 DePaul Law Review, Forthcoming Stanford Public Law Working Paper No. 1695235 Abstract: This Essay focuses on two strands, or themes, that seem to me central to understanding the place of uncertainty in the rich history of tort law: first, from a liability (or substantive doctrinal) perspective, the tension between rules and standards; and, second, from a remedial perspective, the claims for “make whole” versus categorical damages. From a liability perspective, I begin by examining accident law from a historical vantage point, emphasizing the rules-dominant character of the system in earlier times. I then explore the heyday of standards, beginning in the mid-1960s, which is followed by what I regard as a period of equipoise extending to the present day. From a damages perspective, I contrast some of the judicial and scholarly efforts to promote categorical initiatives with the strong adherence to a “make-whole” approach to compensation in the courts. To conclude this perspective, I provide an afterword on punitive damages. A brief summary suggests that both ethical and pragmatic concerns illuminate why the tension between liability rules and standards, as well as between make-whole and categorical approaches to damages, resists full resolution.
Number of Pages in PDF File: 30 Keywords: Tort law Accepted Paper SeriesDate posted: October 21, 2010Suggested CitationContact Information
|
|
||||||||||||
© 2013 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
FAQ
Terms of Use
Privacy Policy
Copyright
This page was processed by apollo7 in 0.516 seconds