-
3
-
-
33750238722
-
-
21 HARV. L. REV. 383 (examining the relationship between legislation and judge-made law)
-
Roscoe Pound, Common Law and Legislation, 21 HARV. L. REV. 383 (1908) (examining the relationship between legislation and judge-made law).
-
(1908)
Common Law and Legislation
-
-
Pound, R.1
-
5
-
-
84878158661
-
-
69 WASH. U. L.Q. 49, 51
-
See, e.g., Patrick J. Kelley, Proximate Cause in Negligence Law: History, Theory, and the Present Darkness, 69 WASH. U. L.Q. 49, 51 (1991)
-
(1991)
Proximate Cause in Negligence Law: History, Theory, and the Present Darkness
-
-
Kelley, P.J.1
-
6
-
-
0039233085
-
-
12 J. LEGAL STUD. 109 (endeavoring to analyze causation within an economic paradigm of torts)
-
William M. Landes & Richard A. Posner, Causation in Tort Law: An Economk Approach, 12 J. LEGAL STUD. 109 (1983) (endeavoring to analyze causation within an economic paradigm of torts)
-
(1983)
Causation in Tort Law: An Economk Approach
-
-
Landes, W.M.1
Posner, R.A.2
-
8
-
-
0039233085
-
-
73 CAL. L. REV. 1735, (attempting to develop a "more satisfactory" explanation of causation)
-
Richard W. Wright, Causation in Tort Law, 73 CAL. L. REV. 1735, 1740 (1985) (attempting to develop a "more satisfactory" explanation of causation).
-
(1985)
Causation in Tort Law
, pp. 1740
-
-
Wright, R.W.1
-
9
-
-
0346449881
-
-
54 VAND. L. REV. 941, 945 (recognizing the overlap between different aspects of causation and arguing that cause-in-fact and normative judgments about liability should be clearly distinguished).
-
See Jane Stapleton, Legal Cause: Cause-in-Fact and the Scope of Liability for Consequences, 54 VAND. L. REV. 941, 945 (2001) (recognizing the overlap between different aspects of causation and arguing that cause-in-fact and normative judgments about liability should be clearly distinguished).
-
(2001)
Legal Cause: Cause-in-Fact and the Scope of Liability for Consequences
-
-
Stapleton, J.1
-
19
-
-
77952327119
-
-
162 N.E. 99, 103 (N.Y.) (Andrews, J., dissenting)
-
See, e.g., Palsgraf v. Long Island R.R. Co., 162 N.E. 99, 103 (N.Y. 1928) (Andrews, J., dissenting)
-
(1928)
Palsgraf V. Long Island R.R. Co.
-
-
-
23
-
-
84878143742
-
-
547 U.S. 451, (Thomas, J., concurring in part and dissenting in part)
-
See Anza v. Ideal Steel Supply Corp., 547 U.S. 451, 469-70 (2006) (Thomas, J., concurring in part and dissenting in part).
-
(2006)
Anza V. Ideal Steel Supply Corp.
, pp. 469-470
-
-
-
24
-
-
84878154780
-
-
503 U.s. at 268-74
-
Holmes, 503 U.s. at 268-74).
-
Holmes
-
-
-
27
-
-
27844588668
-
-
§ 430 (indicating that to establish legal cause the plaintiff must be in the class of persons to which the defendant's actions create a risk of causing harm)
-
RESTATEMENT (FIRST) OF TORTS § 430 (1934) (indicating that to establish legal cause the plaintiff must be in the class of persons to which the defendant's actions create a risk of causing harm)
-
(1934)
Restatement (First) of Torts
-
-
-
34
-
-
0039570411
-
-
(arguing for a more fluid notion of statutory interpretation)
-
WILLIAM N. ESKRIDGE, JR., DYNAMIC STATUTORY INTERPRETATION (1994) (arguing for a more fluid notion of statutory interpretation)
-
(1994)
Dynamic Statutory Interpretation
-
-
Eskridge Jr., W.N.1
-
35
-
-
0043233865
-
-
generally, 87 MICH. L. REV. 20 (describing various statutory interpretation techniques)
-
See generally T. Alexander Aleinikoff, Updating Statutory Interpretation, 87 MICH. L. REV. 20 (1988) (describing various statutory interpretation techniques).
-
(1988)
Updating Statutory Interpretation
-
-
Alexander Aleinikoff, T.1
-
36
-
-
84878159765
-
-
131 S. Ct. 1186, 1191 (considering proximate cause under USERRA when proximate cause is not needed to resolve the question before the Court)
-
See, e, g., Staub v. Proctor Hosp., 131 S. Ct. 1186, 1191 (2011) (considering proximate cause under USERRA when proximate cause is not needed to resolve the question before the Court).
-
(2011)
Staub V. Proctor Hosp.
-
-
-
37
-
-
0345753032
-
-
96 YALE L.J. 743 (discussing how deconstructionist principles apply to interpretation)
-
J.M. Balkin, Deconstructive Practice and Legal Theory, 96 YALE L.J. 743 (1987) (discussing how deconstructionist principles apply to interpretation)
-
(1987)
Deconstructive Practice and Legal Theory
-
-
Balkin, J.M.1
-
39
-
-
32044457967
-
-
106 COLUM. L. REV. 70, 78 (noting that the line between textualism and purposivism is not "cut-and-dried")
-
See John F. Manning, What Divides Textualists from Purposivists, 106 COLUM. L. REV. 70, 78 (2006) (noting that the line between textualism and purposivism is not "cut-and-dried")
-
(2006)
What Divides Textualists from Purposivists
-
-
Manning, J.F.1
-
40
-
-
18444417148
-
-
91 VA. L. REV. 347
-
Caleb Nelson, What Is Textualism?, 91 VA. L. REV. 347, 355-56 (2005)
-
(2005)
What Is Textualism?
, pp. 355-356
-
-
Nelson, C.1
-
43
-
-
70649097995
-
-
24 CONST. COMMENT. 427, 429 n.6 (noting that textualists, purposivists and intentionalists disagree about how and whether to recognize gaps and what to do if the statute has gaps, or vague or ambiguous provisions)
-
See Jack M. Balkin, Original Meaning and Constitutional Redemption, 24 CONST. COMMENT. 427, 429 n.6 (noting that textualists, purposivists and intentionalists disagree about how and whether to recognize gaps and what to do if the statute has gaps, or vague or ambiguous provisions).
-
Original Meaning and Constitutional Redemption
-
-
Balkin, J.M.1
-
45
-
-
78649613109
-
-
98 CAL. L. REV. 1287 (exploring the evolution of textualism and critiques of first-generation textualism's premises)
-
See John F. Manning, Second-Generation Textualism, 98 CAL. L. REV. 1287 (2010) (exploring the evolution of textualism and critiques of first-generation textualism's premises)
-
(2010)
Second-Generation Textualism
-
-
Manning, J.F.1
-
46
-
-
0347513727
-
-
37 UCLA L. REV. 621 (examining new textualism in comparison to the traditional approach)
-
see also William N. Eskridge, Jr., The New Textualism, 37 UCLA L. REV. 621 (1990) (examining new textualism in comparison to the traditional approach)
-
(1990)
The New Textualism
-
-
Eskridge Jr., W.N.1
-
47
-
-
78649591260
-
-
73 WASH. U. L.Q. 1085, 1087, 1090 (discussing "new textualism" and its tendency to merge with other interpretive methods)
-
Philip P. Frickey, Faithful Interpretation, 73 WASH. U. L.Q. 1085, 1087, 1090 (1995) (discussing "new textualism" and its tendency to merge with other interpretive methods)
-
(1995)
Faithful Interpretation
-
-
Frickey, P.P.1
-
51
-
-
84859387507
-
-
405 F.3d 840, 846 n.6 (10th Cir.) (noting that definitions in statute must be read broadly to effectuate the statute's liberal purpose)
-
See Bd. of Cnty. Comm'rs v. EEOC, 405 F.3d 840, 846 n.6 (10th Cir. 2005) (noting that definitions in statute must be read broadly to effectuate the statute's liberal purpose).
-
(2005)
Bd. of Cnty. Comm'rs V. EEOC
-
-
-
54
-
-
0043149973
-
-
60 TEX. L. REV. 661, (discussing common law interpretation)
-
see also William F. Baxter, Separation of Powers, Prosecutorial Discretion, and the "Common Law" Nature of Antitrust Law, 60 TEX. L. REV. 661, 662-67 (1982) (discussing common law interpretation).
-
(1982)
Separation of Powers, Prosecutorial Discretion, and the "common Law" Nature of Antitrust Law
, pp. 662-667
-
-
Baxter, W.F.1
-
58
-
-
84873091177
-
-
Chevron U.S.A., Inc., 467 U.S. 837, 843
-
See Chevron U.S.A., Inc. v. Natural Res. Def. Council, Inc., 467 U.S. 837, 843 (1984).
-
(1984)
Inc. V. Natural Res. Def. Council
-
-
-
59
-
-
84878159765
-
-
131 S. Ct. 1186, 1191 (applying proximate cause to the Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act of 1994 (USERRA))
-
See, e.g., Staub v. Proctor Hosp., 131 S. Ct. 1186, 1191 (2011) (applying proximate cause to the Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act of 1994 (USERRA))
-
(2011)
Staub V. Proctor Hosp.
-
-
-
60
-
-
84878143742
-
-
547 U.S. 451, 453 (restating that proximate cause is required to sue under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO))
-
Anza v. Ideal Steel Supply Corp., 547 U.S. 451, 453 (2006) (restating that proximate cause is required to sue under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO))
-
(2006)
Anza V. Ideal Steel Supply Corp.
-
-
-
61
-
-
71949127214
-
-
544 U.S. 336, (requiring proximate cause for claims involving securities fraud)
-
Dura Pharms., Inc. v. Broudo, 544 U.S. 336, 342-346 (2005) (requiring proximate cause for claims involving securities fraud)
-
(2005)
Dura Pharms., Inc. V. Broudo
, pp. 342-346
-
-
-
62
-
-
74249121761
-
-
542 U.S. 692, (examining proximate causation with respect to the Federal Tort Claims Act)
-
Sosa v. Alvarez-Machain, 542 U.S. 692, 703-04 (2004) (examining proximate causation with respect to the Federal Tort Claims Act)
-
(2004)
Sosa V. Alvarez-Machain
, pp. 703-704
-
-
-
63
-
-
84878119136
-
-
538 U.S. 314, (Thomas, J., dissenting) (discussing proximate causation as being required by language in the Bankruptcy Code)
-
Archer v. Warner, 538 U.S. 314, 325-26 (2003) (Thomas, J., dissenting) (discussing proximate causation as being required by language in the Bankruptcy Code)
-
(2003)
Archer V. Warner
, pp. 325-326
-
-
-
64
-
-
84878162435
-
-
503 U.S. 258, (requiring proximate cause for a successful claim under RICO)
-
Holmes v. Sec. Investor Prot. Corp., 503 U.S. 258, 267-68 (1992) (requiring proximate cause for a successful claim under RICO)
-
(1992)
Holmes V. Sec. Investor Prot. Corp.
, pp. 267-268
-
-
-
65
-
-
84878138226
-
-
Associated Gen. Contractors of Cal., 459 U.S. 519, 535-36 (discussing proximate cause in relation to a claim under the Clayton Act)
-
Associated Gen. Contractors of Cal., Inc. v. Cal. State Council of Carpenters, 459 U.S. 519, 535-36 (1983) (discussing proximate cause in relation to a claim under the Clayton Act)
-
(1983)
Inc. V. Cal. State Council of Carpenters
-
-
-
66
-
-
77955536206
-
-
541 U.S. 752, 767 (reasoning that the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) requires a causal standard similar to proximate cause)
-
see also, e.g., Dep't of Transp. v. Pub. Citizen, 541 U.S. 752, 767 (2004) (reasoning that the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) requires a causal standard similar to proximate cause)
-
(2004)
Dep't of Transp. V. Pub. Citizen
-
-
-
67
-
-
84878156046
-
-
517 U.S. 830, (discussing proximate cause in admiralty context, not in statutory context)
-
Exxon Co., U.S.A. v. Sofec, Inc., 517 U.S. 830, 839-41 (1996) (discussing proximate cause in admiralty context, not in statutory context)
-
(1996)
Exxon Co., U.S.A. V. Sofec, Inc.
, pp. 839-841
-
-
-
68
-
-
77950473969
-
-
for a Great Or., 515 U.S. 687, 713 (O'Connor, J., concurring) (discussing proximate causation as related to the Endangered Species Act (ESA))
-
Babbitt v. Sweet Home Chapter of Cmtys. for a Great Or., 515 U.S. 687, 713 (1995) (O'Connor, J., concurring) (discussing proximate causation as related to the Endangered Species Act (ESA))
-
(1995)
Babbitt V. Sweet Home Chapter of Cmtys
-
-
-
69
-
-
84860168610
-
-
513 U.S. 527, (discussing whether language in the Extension of Admiralty Jurisdiction Act required proximate causation)
-
Jerome B. Grubart, Inc. v. Great Lakes Dredge & Dock Co., 513 U.S. 527, 536-37 (1995) (discussing whether language in the Extension of Admiralty Jurisdiction Act required proximate causation).
-
(1995)
Inc. V. Great Lakes Dredge & Dock Co.
, pp. 536-537
-
-
Grubart, J.B.1
-
70
-
-
84876807012
-
-
131 S. Ct. 2630, (refusing to import traditional common law proximate cause into FELA, but holding that the statutory language has a different proximate cause limit)
-
see, e.g., CSX Transp., Inc. v. McBride, 131 S. Ct. 2630, 2641-44 (2011) (refusing to import traditional common law proximate cause into FELA, but holding that the statutory language has a different proximate cause limit).
-
(2011)
CSX Transp., Inc. V. McBride
, pp. 2641-2644
-
-
-
72
-
-
84878117908
-
-
503 U.S. at 266-68
-
See Holmes, 503 U.S. at 266-68.
-
Holmes
-
-
-
74
-
-
84878150082
-
-
503 U.S. at 258
-
See Holmes, 503 U.S. at 258.
-
Holmes
-
-
-
75
-
-
84878164090
-
-
503 U.S. at 266 n.10
-
See Holmes, 503 U.S. at 266 n.10.
-
Holmes
-
-
-
77
-
-
84878146310
-
-
503 U.S. at 267
-
Holmes, 503 U.S. at 267.
-
Holmes
-
-
-
78
-
-
84876635629
-
-
Pub. L. No. 103-3, 107 Stat. 6 (codified as amended in scattered sections of 5 and 29 U.S.C.)
-
See, e.g, Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993, Pub. L. No. 103-3, 107 Stat. 6 (codified as amended in scattered sections of 5 and 29 U.S.C.)
-
Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993
-
-
-
81
-
-
77950482870
-
-
467 U.S. 837 (considering several cases regarding the method of enactment by States of the Clean Air Act and EPA regulations)
-
See, e.g., Chevron U.S.A. Inc. v. Natural Res. Def. Council, Inc., 467 U.S. 837 (1984) (considering several cases regarding the method of enactment by States of the Clean Air Act and EPA regulations)
-
(1984)
Chevron U.S.A. Inc. V. Natural Res. Def. Council, Inc.
-
-
-
83
-
-
84878146451
-
-
W. Va. Univ. Hosps., 499 U.S. 83, 101 n.7 (indicating that the will of Congress is a "will expressed and fixed in a particular enactment")
-
See W. Va. Univ. Hosps., Inc. v. Casey, 499 U.S. 83, 101 n.7 (1990) (indicating that the will of Congress is a "will expressed and fixed in a particular enactment").
-
(1990)
Inc. V. Casey
-
-
-
87
-
-
84878155715
-
-
503 U.S. at 268
-
Holmes, 503 U.S. at 268.
-
Holmes
-
-
-
88
-
-
84878143237
-
-
656 F.3d 359, 362 (6th Cir.)
-
See Hirsch v. CSX Transp., Inc., 656 F.3d 359, 362 (6th Cir. 2011).
-
(2011)
Hirsch V. CSX Transp., Inc.
-
-
-
89
-
-
84878132719
-
-
131 S. Ct. 1186, 1191 (noting that USERRA is very similar to Title VII)
-
See Staubv. Proctor Hosp., 131 S. Ct. 1186,1191 (2011) (noting that USERRA is very similar to Title VII).
-
(2011)
Staubv. Proctor Hosp.
-
-
-
90
-
-
84878130843
-
-
514 F.3d 217, 228 n.11 (2d Cir.) (noting independent contractors are not protected by Title VII)
-
Salamon v. Our Lady of Victory Hosp., 514 F.3d 217, 228 n.11 (2d Cir. 2008) (noting independent contractors are not protected by Title VII).
-
(2008)
Salamon V. Our Lady of Victory Hosp.
-
-
-
91
-
-
80053357755
-
-
generally, 110 MICH. L. REV. 69 (arguing that courts have narrowly construed Title VII's language to restrict the types of prohibited conduct)
-
See generally Sandra F. Sperino, Rethinking Discrimination Law, 110 MICH. L. REV. 69 (2011) (arguing that courts have narrowly construed Title VII's language to restrict the types of prohibited conduct).
-
(2011)
Rethinking Discrimination Law
-
-
Sperino, S.F.1
-
92
-
-
84878159981
-
-
655 F.3d 796, 800 (8th Cir.)
-
See, e.g., Brooks v. Midwest Heart Grp., 655 F.3d 796, 800 (8th Cir. 2011).
-
(2011)
Brooks V. Midwest Heart Grp.
-
-
-
94
-
-
84878154982
-
-
Associated Gen. 459 U.S. at 534 (internal quotations omitted)
-
Associated Gen. Contractors, 459 U.S. at 534 (internal quotations omitted).
-
Contractors
-
-
-
95
-
-
84878154982
-
-
Associated Cen. 459 U.S. at 532, n.24 & 533
-
Associated Cen. Contractors, 459 U.S. at 532, n.24 & 533.
-
Contractors
-
-
-
96
-
-
84878138648
-
-
131 S. Ct. 1186, 1193
-
See Staub v. Procter Hosp., 131 S. Ct. 1186, 1193 (2011).
-
(2011)
Staub V. Procter Hosp.
-
-
-
97
-
-
84878159215
-
-
It also cited, 542 U.S. 692
-
It also cited Sosa v. Alvarez-Macham, 542 U.S. 692 (2004).
-
(2004)
Sosa V. Alvarez-Macham
-
-
-
98
-
-
84878149542
-
-
131 S. Ct. at 1192 (citing Sosa, 542 U.S. at 704)
-
See Staub, 131 S. Ct. at 1192 (citing Sosa, 542 U.S. at 704).
-
Staub
-
-
-
99
-
-
77950491923
-
-
90 B.U. L REV. 51, 53 (describing patent law as a "common law enabling statute.")
-
Craig Allen Nard, Legal Forms and the Common Law of Patents, 90 B.U. L REV. 51, 53 (2010) (describing patent law as a "common law enabling statute.").
-
(2010)
Legal Forms and the Common Law of Patents
-
-
Nard, C.A.1
-
100
-
-
84878141894
-
-
The Conflict Between Textualism and Antitrust, 14J. CONTEMP. LEGAL ISSUES 619, 620
-
Daniel A. Farber & Brett H. McDonnell, "Is There a Text in This Class?" The Conflict Between Textualism and Antitrust, 14J. CONTEMP. LEGAL ISSUES 619, 620 (2005).
-
(2005)
Is There A Text in This Class?
-
-
Farber, D.A.1
McDonnell, B.H.2
-
102
-
-
77953264171
-
-
96 VA. L. REV. 485, 519 (arguing the courts should not apply equitable balancing in statutory cases)
-
Jared A. Goldstein, Equitable Balancing in the Age of Statutes, 96 VA. L. REV. 485, 519 (2010) (arguing the courts should not apply equitable balancing in statutory cases).
-
(2010)
Equitable Balancing in the Age of Statutes
-
-
Goldstein, J.A.1
-
103
-
-
77950473969
-
-
515 U.S. 687, 712 (holding that "harm" can include habitat modification)
-
See Babbitt v. Sweet Home Chapter of Cmtys. for a Great Or., 515 U.S. 687, 712 (1995) (holding that "harm" can include habitat modification).
-
(1995)
Babbitt V. Sweet Home Chapter of Cmtys. for A Great Or.
-
-
-
104
-
-
84878158264
-
-
131 5. Ct. 1186, 1191 ("[W]hen Congress creates a federal tort it adopts the background of general tort law.")
-
See Staub v. Proctor Hosp., 131 5. Ct. 1186, 1191 (2011) ("[W]hen Congress creates a federal tort it adopts the background of general tort law.").
-
(2011)
Staub V. Proctor Hosp.
-
-
-
106
-
-
84878150328
-
-
21 TEX. L. REV. 697, (noting that it is of little value to say that a "tort is something that is actionable but is neither a contract nor a quasi-contract")
-
Max Radin, A Speculative Inquiry into the Nature of Torts, 21 TEX. L. REV. 697, 698-99 (1943) (noting that it is of little value to say that a "tort is something that is actionable but is neither a contract nor a quasi-contract").
-
(1943)
A Speculative Inquiry into the Nature of Torts
, pp. 698-99
-
-
Radin, M.1
-
107
-
-
84878130843
-
-
514 F.3d 217, 228 n.11 (2d Cir.) (noting independent contractors are not protected by Title VII)
-
Salamon v. Our Lady of Victory Hosp., 514 F.3d 217, 228 n.11 (2d Cir. 2008) (noting independent contractors are not protected by Title VII).
-
(2008)
Salamon V. Our Lady of Victory Hosp.
-
-
-
108
-
-
79955886575
-
-
29 U.S.C. §§ 2601-2654
-
See, e.g., Family and Medical Leave Act, 29 U.S.C. §§ 2601-2654 (2006).
-
(2006)
Family and Medical Leave Act
-
-
-
109
-
-
0345847813
-
-
75 TEX. L. REV. 1765, 1773 n.30 (stating that the rule of proximate cause is so broad in intentional torts that it almost has "the full reach of factual causation")
-
David W. Robertson, The Common Sense of Cause in Fact, 75 TEX. L. REV. 1765, 1773 n.30 (1997) (stating that the rule of proximate cause is so broad in intentional torts that it almost has "the full reach of factual causation").
-
(1997)
The Common Sense of Cause in Fact
-
-
Robertson, D.W.1
-
110
-
-
84878159765
-
-
131 S. Ct. 1186, 1191
-
Staub v. Proctor Hosp., 131 S. Ct. 1186, 1191 (2011)
-
(2011)
Staub V. Proctor Hosp.
-
-
-
112
-
-
84878159567
-
-
48 WM. & MARY L. REV. 2115, 2147 (noting that discrimination claims "often articulate a type of injury-disproportionately experienced by members of subordinated groups-that cannot be pinned down as psychological, economic, or physical in nature, or as either individual or group based")
-
For some statutes, it may be even more difficult to characterize the harms. Martha Chamallas, Discrimination and Outrage: The Migration from Civil Rights to Tort Law, 48 WM. & MARY L. REV. 2115, 2147 (2007) (noting that discrimination claims "often articulate a type of injury-disproportionately experienced by members of subordinated groups-that cannot be pinned down as psychological, economic, or physical in nature, or as either individual or group based").
-
(2007)
Discrimination and Outrage: The Migration from Civil Rights to Tort Law
-
-
Chamallas, M.1
-
113
-
-
84878159765
-
-
131 S. Ct. 1186, 1193
-
Staub v. Proctor Hosp., 131 S. Ct. 1186, 1193 (2011).
-
(2011)
Staub V. Proctor Hosp.
-
-
-
114
-
-
84878155131
-
-
Inc., 656 F.3d 359, 362 (6th Cir.) (describing elements of negligence)
-
See, e.g., Hirsch v. CSX Transp., Inc., 656 F.3d 359, 362 (6th Cir. 2011) (describing elements of negligence).
-
(2011)
Hirsch V. CSX Transp.
-
-
-
115
-
-
33645559309
-
-
74 U. CIN. L. REV. 11, 12 (discussing how charitable immunity waned in the 20th century)
-
At times, either by common law or statutes, certain types of potential defendants are exempted from liability; however, the modern trend is to reduce the available exemptions. Victor E. Schwartz & Leah Lorber, Defining the Duty of Religious Institutions to Protect Others: Surgical Instruments, Not Machetes, Are Required, 74 U. CIN. L. REV. 11, 12 (2005) (discussing how charitable immunity waned in the 20th century).
-
(2005)
Defining the Duty of Religious Institutions to Protect Others: Surgical Instruments, Not Machetes, Are Required
-
-
Schwartz, V.E.1
Lorber, L.2
-
117
-
-
0036994162
-
-
50 UCLA L. REV. 293, 300 (arguing that proximate cause is two doctrines: one focusing on multiple causes and one focusing on cases with multiple risks)
-
Mark F. Grady, Proximate Cause Decoded, 50 UCLA L. REV. 293, 300 (2002) (arguing that proximate cause is two doctrines: one focusing on multiple causes and one focusing on cases with multiple risks).
-
(2002)
Proximate Cause Decoded
-
-
Grady, M.F.1
-
118
-
-
84901592727
-
-
249 F.3d 1068, 1070-71 (D.C. Cir.) (discussing how the district court used the proximate cause standard from RESTATEMENT (SECOND) OF TORTS § 431 (1965) to evaluate proximate cause)
-
See, e.g., Service Emps. Int'l Union Health & Welfare Fund v. Philip Morris, Inc., 249 F.3d 1068, 1070-71 (D.C. Cir. 2001) (discussing how the district court used the proximate cause standard from RESTATEMENT (SECOND) OF TORTS § 431 (1965) to evaluate proximate cause)
-
(2001)
Service Emps. Int'l Union Health & Welfare Fund V. Philip Morris, Inc.
-
-
-
119
-
-
84878118205
-
-
No. 2:07-CV-64, 2009 WL 2170146, at 7-8 (E.D. Tenn. July 21,)
-
Quade v. Rodriguez, No. 2:07-CV-64, 2009 WL 2170146, at 7-8 (E.D. Tenn. July 21, 2009).
-
(2009)
Quade V. Rodriguez
-
-
-
120
-
-
84878138266
-
-
503 U.S. 258, 266 (stating that it is very unlikely that "Congress meant to allow all factually injured plaintiffs to recover" and thus RICO should not be read expansively)
-
See Holmes v. Sec. Investor Prot. Corp., 503 U.S. 258, 266 (1992) (stating that it is very unlikely that "Congress meant to allow all factually injured plaintiffs to recover" and thus RICO should not be read expansively)
-
(1992)
Holmes V. Sec. Investor Prot. Corp.
-
-
-
121
-
-
84878119472
-
-
ch. 647, 26 Stat. 209 (codified as amended at 15 U.S.C. § 1-7 (2006))
-
Sherman Act, ch. 647, 26 Stat. 209 (1890) (codified as amended at 15 U.S.C. § 1-7 (2006))
-
(1890)
Sherman Act
-
-
-
122
-
-
84900424706
-
-
Pub. L. No. 91-452, 84 Stat. 922 (codified as amended at 18 U.S.C. §§ 1961-68 (2006))
-
Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, Pub. L. No. 91-452, 84 Stat. 922 (1970) (codified as amended at 18 U.S.C. §§ 1961-68 (2006)).
-
(1970)
Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act
-
-
-
125
-
-
84878145464
-
-
503 U.S. at 268
-
Holmes, 503 U.S. at 268.
-
Holmes
-
-
-
126
-
-
84878147650
-
-
131 S. Ct. 1186, 1192 n.2 (citing RESTATEMENT (SECOND) OF TORTS §§ 435, 435B, cmt. a)
-
Staub v. Proctor Hosp., 131 S. Ct. 1186, 1192 n.2 (citing RESTATEMENT (SECOND) OF TORTS §§ 435, 435B, cmt. a (1965)).
-
(1965)
Staub V. Proctor Hosp.
-
-
-
127
-
-
84878144245
-
-
W. Va. Univ. Hosps., 499 U.S. 83, (articulating that the court should interpret ambiguous terms in light of recent and past legislation as it is the court's role "to make sense... out of the corpus juris"). This inquiry also overlaps with statutory interpretation methodologies
-
W. Va. Univ. Hosps., Inc. v. Casey, 499 U.S. 83, 100-01 (1991) (articulating that the court should interpret ambiguous terms in light of recent and past legislation as it is the court's role "to make sense... out of the corpus juris"). This inquiry also overlaps with statutory interpretation methodologies.
-
(1991)
Inc. V. Casey
, pp. 100-101
-
-
-
128
-
-
69749123578
-
-
generally, 81 TEMP L. REV. 635 (considering whether new or modified rules of interpretation should be applied only prospectively or also retrospectively)
-
See generally Brian G. Slocum, Overlooked Temporal Issues in Statutory Interpretation, 81 TEMP L. REV. 635 (2008) (considering whether new or modified rules of interpretation should be applied only prospectively or also retrospectively)
-
(2008)
Overlooked Temporal Issues in Statutory Interpretation
-
-
Slocum, B.G.1
-
129
-
-
84878157798
-
-
CSX Transp., 131 S. Ct. 2630, 2637 (noting that common law proximate cause "formulations varied, and were often both constricted and difficult to comprehend")
-
CSX Transp., Inc. v. McBride, 131 S. Ct. 2630, 2637 (2011) (noting that common law proximate cause "formulations varied, and were often both constricted and difficult to comprehend").
-
(2011)
Inc. V. McBride
-
-
-
130
-
-
84878158199
-
-
586 S.E.2d 26, 29 (Ga. Ct. App.)
-
John Crane, Inc. v. Jones, 586 S.E.2d 26, 29 (Ga. Ct. App. 2003).
-
(2003)
Inc. V. Jones
-
-
Crane, J.1
-
131
-
-
77952327119
-
-
162 N.E. 99, 103 (N.Y.) (Andrews, J., dissenting)
-
Palsgraf v. Long Island R.R., 162 N.E. 99, 103 (N.Y. 1928) (Andrews, J., dissenting).
-
(1928)
Palsgraf V. Long Island R.R.
-
-
-
132
-
-
77951690665
-
-
Introduction (discussing how courts import common law principles into statutory analysis but vary the underlying principles given the particular statutory regime)
-
See RESTATEMENT (THIRD) OF AGENCY, Introduction (2006) (discussing how courts import common law principles into statutory analysis but vary the underlying principles given the particular statutory regime).
-
(2006)
Restatement (Third) of Agency
-
-
-
134
-
-
84878159765
-
-
131 S. Ct. 1186, 1191-93
-
Staub v. Proctor Hosp., 131 S. Ct. 1186, 1191-93 (2011).
-
(2011)
Staub V. Proctor Hosp.
-
-
-
137
-
-
84878126153
-
-
67 N.C. L. REV. 77
-
The inconsistent theoretical foundations of proximate cause and its changing nature make it difficult to define for juries. Jurors often misunderstand proximate cause instructions. Walter W. & Elizabeth C. Thornburg, Juiy Instructions: A Persistent Failure to Communicate, 67 N.C. L. REV. 77, 88-95 (1988).
-
(1988)
Juiy Instructions: A Persistent Failure to Communicate
, pp. 88-95
-
-
Walter, W.1
Thornburg, E.C.2
-
138
-
-
77950305050
-
-
129 S. Ct. 2658, 2664-65, 2672 (deciding statutory question first and declining to reach constitutional issue)
-
See, e.g., Ricci v. DeStefano, 129 S. Ct. 2658, 2664-65, 2672 (2009) (deciding statutory question first and declining to reach constitutional issue).
-
(2009)
Ricci V. DeStefano
-
-
|