Among industrialized nations, the United States is unique in addressing tort law at the state rather than the national level. For example, Australia and Canada, which share a common-law heritage with the United States, have federal tort systems. The United States approach may be appropriate in some tort settings, such as in the premises liability or motor vehicle accident context (not involving a claim of products liability), where the state rule's impact remains within that state's geographical boundaries. Unlike the simple 'fender-bender', which occurs within the borders of one state, the typical product is manufactured and marketed nationally or internationally. Therefore, several factors suggest that uniform federal treatment of product liability laws may be a more desirable means of regulation.
Korzec, "Products Liability Harmonization: A Uniform Standard"
- Dewey v. Volkswagen opening brief
- Around the web, July 27
- Around the web, May 23
- Told-you-so dept.: USDOT exonerates Toyota
- New Jersey's jurisdictional grab, cont'd
- Oklahoma can't seek damages in chicken suit
- "The U.S. Can't Be the World's Court"
- "A malignant form of institutional competition"
- Parloff on Russia v. Bank of New York Mellon
- In a Moscow courtroom
- Two good background reads
- Supreme Court limits HMO suits to federal courts