Unloved: Tort in the Modern Legal Academy

IF 2.4 3区 社会学 Q1 LAW Vanderbilt Law Review Pub Date : 2002-11-15 DOI:10.2139/SSRN.347361
John C. P. Goldberg
{"title":"Unloved: Tort in the Modern Legal Academy","authors":"John C. P. Goldberg","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.347361","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In The Idea of Private Law, Ernest Weinrib argues that tort law is \"just like love.\" By this, he means that tort law is best understood formally, for what it is, rather than functionally, for what it does. Formalist theory is presented as a stark alternative to the instrumentalist theories that have dominated modern American torts scholarship. This essay argues that Weinrib's approach is, in one important and revealing respect, of a piece with those that he criticizes. Specifically, by conveying an attitude of fatalistic acceptance toward tort law, it partakes of the generally unsympathetic disposition maintained by the vast majority of modern tort scholars toward their subject. For Weinrib, no less than for Calabresi, Coleman, Epstein, and Posner, tort law remains \"unloved.\"","PeriodicalId":47503,"journal":{"name":"Vanderbilt Law Review","volume":"55 1","pages":"1501"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2002-11-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Vanderbilt Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.347361","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: 3

Abstract

In The Idea of Private Law, Ernest Weinrib argues that tort law is "just like love." By this, he means that tort law is best understood formally, for what it is, rather than functionally, for what it does. Formalist theory is presented as a stark alternative to the instrumentalist theories that have dominated modern American torts scholarship. This essay argues that Weinrib's approach is, in one important and revealing respect, of a piece with those that he criticizes. Specifically, by conveying an attitude of fatalistic acceptance toward tort law, it partakes of the generally unsympathetic disposition maintained by the vast majority of modern tort scholars toward their subject. For Weinrib, no less than for Calabresi, Coleman, Epstein, and Posner, tort law remains "unloved."
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
不受喜爱:现代法学界的侵权行为
在《私法思想》一书中,欧内斯特·温瑞布认为侵权法“就像爱情一样”。通过这一点,他的意思是侵权法最好是形式上的理解,因为它是什么,而不是功能上的理解,因为它做了什么。形式主义理论与主导现代美国侵权研究的工具主义理论截然不同。这篇文章认为,在一个重要且具有启发性的方面,Weinrib的方法与他所批评的人是一致的。具体来说,它传达了一种对侵权法的宿命论的接受态度,这与绝大多数现代侵权学者对其主体所持的普遍冷漠的态度是一致的。对于Weinrib来说,不低于卡拉布雷西、科尔曼、爱泼斯坦和波斯纳,侵权法仍然是“不受欢迎的”。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 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.
期刊最新文献
Beyond Wickedness: Managing Complex Systems and Climate Change Formal Justice and Judicial Precedent Rights, Wrongs, and Recourse in the Law of Torts Discovery Cost Allocation, Due Process, and the Constitution's Role in Civil Litigation Judging Law in Election Cases
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1