Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorColeman, Jules
dc.date2021-11-25T13:34:41.000
dc.date.accessioned2021-11-26T11:44:41Z
dc.date.available2021-11-26T11:44:41Z
dc.date.issued1992-01-01T00:00:00-08:00
dc.identifierfss_papers/4207
dc.identifier.contextkey4158607
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/20.500.13051/3675
dc.description.abstractIn contemporary tort theory, both economists and moralists advance the view that tort law can be understood as the embodiment of one fundamental, overarching principle. For economists it is the principle of efficiency. For some moralists, like George Fletcher, it is the principle of reciprocity of risk. While for others, like Richard Epstein, it is the principle of causal responsibility. In contrast, I reject the idea that the practice can be understood as a unified whole and argue that tort law implements a variety of different principles and policies. Some of these are economic in nature, others moral. In this Essay, I develop the underlying moral principle involved in tort law–the principle of corrective justice.
dc.titleThe Mixed Conception of Corrective Justice
dc.source.journaltitleFaculty Scholarship Series
refterms.dateFOA2021-11-26T11:44:41Z
dc.identifier.legacycoverpagehttps://digitalcommons.law.yale.edu/fss_papers/4207
dc.identifier.legacyfulltexthttps://digitalcommons.law.yale.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=5205&context=fss_papers&unstamped=1


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Name:
77IowaLRev427.pdf
Size:
1.270Mb
Format:
PDF

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record