Against Liability for Private Risk-Exposure

Sheila B. Scheuerman

Charleston School of Law

March 26, 2012

Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy, Vol. 35, 2012, Forthcoming

Can a plaintiff who has not yet suffered an injury sue based on the risk of future harm? After decades of addressing whether these “no injury” or “unmanifested defect” suits are cognizable, courts today are intractably divided. This conflict has created incentives for forum-shopping as plaintiffs search for a jurisdiction friendly to “no injury” lawsuits and class certification. Using these “no injury” or “unmanifested defect” cases as a frame of reference, this Article argues that private risk-exposure should not be compensable. The Article begins by considering whether risk-exposure itself should be considered “harm.” Concluding that risk alone is not a setback to an interest, the Article then examines whether risk exposure should be compensable. Using the two dominant private law camps — utilitarianism and justice — the Article concludes that allowing liability for private risk-exposure is not justified. Claims for private risk-exposure are best addressed through the administrative process.

Number of Pages in PDF File: 61

Keywords: risk, Toyota, torts, class actions, warranty, no injury, products liability

JEL Classification: K12, K13, K4, K41

Open PDF in Browser Download This Paper

Date posted: March 27, 2012  

Suggested Citation

Scheuerman, Sheila B., Against Liability for Private Risk-Exposure (March 26, 2012). Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy, Vol. 35, 2012, Forthcoming. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1984151

Contact Information

Sheila B. Scheuerman (Contact Author)
Charleston School of Law ( email )
Charleston, SC 29402
United States
Feedback to SSRN

Paper statistics
Abstract Views: 761
Downloads: 85
Download Rank: 235,661