Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Symposium Issue: Appraising the Restatement (Third) of Torts: Intentional Torts to Persons

Symposium Issue: Appraising the Restatement (Third) of Torts: Intentional Torts to Persons When the American Law Institute (ALI) decided to produce a Restatement (Third) of Torts, its original plan was to omit coverage of intentional torts. The rationale appeared to be that because of the dearth of judicial opinions on the topic, the Restatement (Second) of Torts remained largely authoritative on those doctrines. An influential voice to the contrary was Kenneth Simons. Although acknowledging restating intentional tort doctrine was not of the highest importance, he argued a number of unresolved issues, including the character of the required intent and distinguishing battery from negligence in medical malpractice cases, deserved attention.Kenneth W. Simons, A Restatement (Third) of Intentional Torts, 48 Ariz. L. Rev. 1061, 1062–1079 (2006); See also Nancy Moore’s contribution to this symposium. Ellie Bublick joined Simons in arguing for coverage of the intentional torts. Ellen M. Bublick, A Restatement (Third) of Torts: Liability for Intentional Harm to Persons—Thoughts, 44 Wake Forest L. Rev. 1335 (2009).The ALI changed course and created the Restatement (Third) of Torts: Intentional Torts to Persons. In 2013, Simons, along with Ellen Pryor, was appointed Co-Reporter of the project. In 2014, when Pryor’s other duties increased, she became Associate Reporter. She served in that capacity for a year, http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Journal of Tort Law de Gruyter

Symposium Issue: Appraising the Restatement (Third) of Torts: Intentional Torts to Persons

Robinette, Christopher J.
Journal of Tort Law , Volume 10 (2): 3 – Sep 25, 2018
Download PDF
3 pages

Loading next page...
 
/lp/de-gruyter/symposium-issue-appraising-the-restatement-third-of-torts-intentional-3PmNVXpKlw

References

References for this paper are not available at this time. We will be adding them shortly, thank you for your patience.

Publisher
de Gruyter
Copyright
© 2017 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston
ISSN
1932-9148
eISSN
1932-9148
DOI
10.1515/jtl-2018-0002
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

When the American Law Institute (ALI) decided to produce a Restatement (Third) of Torts, its original plan was to omit coverage of intentional torts. The rationale appeared to be that because of the dearth of judicial opinions on the topic, the Restatement (Second) of Torts remained largely authoritative on those doctrines. An influential voice to the contrary was Kenneth Simons. Although acknowledging restating intentional tort doctrine was not of the highest importance, he argued a number of unresolved issues, including the character of the required intent and distinguishing battery from negligence in medical malpractice cases, deserved attention.Kenneth W. Simons, A Restatement (Third) of Intentional Torts, 48 Ariz. L. Rev. 1061, 1062–1079 (2006); See also Nancy Moore’s contribution to this symposium. Ellie Bublick joined Simons in arguing for coverage of the intentional torts. Ellen M. Bublick, A Restatement (Third) of Torts: Liability for Intentional Harm to Persons—Thoughts, 44 Wake Forest L. Rev. 1335 (2009).The ALI changed course and created the Restatement (Third) of Torts: Intentional Torts to Persons. In 2013, Simons, along with Ellen Pryor, was appointed Co-Reporter of the project. In 2014, when Pryor’s other duties increased, she became Associate Reporter. She served in that capacity for a year,

Journal

Journal of Tort Law – de Gruyter

Published: Sep 25, 2018

There are no references for this article.