Harry Potter and the Trouble with Tort Theory.
Stanford Law Review 2010, Dec, 63, 1
-
- £2.99
-
- £2.99
Publisher Description
INTRODUCTION The last several decades of tort theory have left us with competing visions. Economists tell us that tort law promotes efficiency by giving people incentives to take account of costs they impose on others. (1) Philosophers tell us that tort law dispenses corrective justice by requiring wrongdoers to repair the wrongful losses they cause. (2) There is much to recommend both views, but there are also reasons to think we cannot have it both ways. My sympathies, I should say up front, lie with the philosophers. However, the aim of this Article is not to defend the claim that tort metes out corrective justice. Rather, the aim is to show that the leading theories of tort are radically incomplete and for roughly the same reason.
More Books by Stanford Law School
Sovereign Wealth Funds and Corporate Governance: A Minimalist Response to the New Mercantilism.
2008
From Jim Crow to Civil Rights: The Supreme Court and the Struggle for Racial Equality (Book Review)
2005
Human Rights and Constitutional Rights: Harmony and Dissonance. (Symposium on Treaties, Enforcement, And U.S. Sovereignty)
2003
Breaking the Law to Enforce It: Undercover Police Participation in Crime.
2009
The Death Penalty: An American History (Book Review)
2004
Investigating the 'CSI Effect' Effect: Media and Litigation Crisis in Criminal Law. ('CSI: Crime Scene Investigation' Television Program) (Symposium: Media, Justice, And the Law)
2009