侵权主义理论与侵权重述

IF 2.4 3区 社会学 Q1 LAW
Keith N. Hylton
{"title":"侵权主义理论与侵权重述","authors":"Keith N. Hylton","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.258774","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The lack of detailed implications and general failure to come to grips with important features of tort doctrine have been substantial shortcomings in the dominant positive theory framework of Holmes and Posner. I extend the dominant framework below to enable it to justify various intentional tort doctrines, and the specific form and allocation of strict liability rules within tort law. After developing the positive framework, I apply it to the Restatement (Third) of Tort Law. The theory explains many of the detailed provisions and commentary of the Restatement, and identifies one area in which the Restatement (Third) seems inconsistent with tort doctrine. I also discuss the value of positive theory as a part of the Restatement project.","PeriodicalId":47503,"journal":{"name":"Vanderbilt Law Review","volume":"54 1","pages":"1413"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2001-02-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"9","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Theory of Tort Doctrine and the Restatement of Torts\",\"authors\":\"Keith N. Hylton\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/SSRN.258774\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The lack of detailed implications and general failure to come to grips with important features of tort doctrine have been substantial shortcomings in the dominant positive theory framework of Holmes and Posner. I extend the dominant framework below to enable it to justify various intentional tort doctrines, and the specific form and allocation of strict liability rules within tort law. After developing the positive framework, I apply it to the Restatement (Third) of Tort Law. The theory explains many of the detailed provisions and commentary of the Restatement, and identifies one area in which the Restatement (Third) seems inconsistent with tort doctrine. I also discuss the value of positive theory as a part of the Restatement project.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47503,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Vanderbilt Law Review\",\"volume\":\"54 1\",\"pages\":\"1413\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2001-02-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"9\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Vanderbilt Law Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.258774\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Vanderbilt Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.258774","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 9

摘要

在霍姆斯和波斯纳主导的实证理论框架中,缺乏详细的含义和普遍未能把握侵权原则的重要特征是实质性的缺陷。我在下面扩展了占主导地位的框架,使其能够证明各种故意侵权理论,以及侵权法中严格责任规则的具体形式和分配。在构建了实证框架之后,笔者将其应用于《侵权行为法重述(三)》。该理论解释了重述的许多详细条款和评注,并确定了重述(第三)似乎与侵权原则不一致的一个领域。作为重述项目的一部分,我也讨论了积极理论的价值。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The Theory of Tort Doctrine and the Restatement of Torts
The lack of detailed implications and general failure to come to grips with important features of tort doctrine have been substantial shortcomings in the dominant positive theory framework of Holmes and Posner. I extend the dominant framework below to enable it to justify various intentional tort doctrines, and the specific form and allocation of strict liability rules within tort law. After developing the positive framework, I apply it to the Restatement (Third) of Tort Law. The theory explains many of the detailed provisions and commentary of the Restatement, and identifies one area in which the Restatement (Third) seems inconsistent with tort doctrine. I also discuss the value of positive theory as a part of the Restatement project.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: Vanderbilt Law Review En Banc is an online forum designed to advance scholarly discussion. En Banc offers professors, practitioners, students, and others an opportunity to respond to articles printed in the Vanderbilt Law Review. En Banc permits extended discussion of our articles in a way that maintains academic integrity and provides authors with a quicker approach to publication. When reexamining a case “en banc” an appellate court operates at its highest level, with all judges present and participating “on the bench.” We chose the name “En Banc” to capture this spirit of focused review and provide a forum for further dialogue where all can be present and participate.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信