Torts: Economic Harm Posts
U.S. Supreme Court Cites Torts 3d: Economic Harm
The U.S. Supreme Court cited Restatement of the Law Third, Torts: Liability for Economic Harm on the topic of common law fraud, in support of its opinion in SEC v. Jarkesy.
The Institute in the Courts: The American Law Institute and State Courts
State courts across the country continue to be guided by the work of The American Law Institute. During the 2022-2023 fiscal year, courts in 49 states and the District of Columbia cited the Restatements of the Law and Principles of the Law over 1000 times.
U.S. Supreme Court Cites Torts 2d and Torts 3d: Economic Harm
Recently, in interpreting the False Claims Act’s scienter requirement, the U.S. Supreme Court turned to the traditional, common-law scienter requirements for fraud set forth in the Restatement of the Law Second, Torts, and the Restatement of the Law Third, Torts: Liability for Economic Harm.
California Court Looks to Restatement of the Law Third, Torts: Liability for Economic Harm
The California Court of Appeal held that claims for fraudulent inducement were not barred by the economic-loss rule as defined by Restatement of the Law Third, Torts: Liability for Economic Harm § 3
The Perils and Promise of Public Nuisance
This article utilizes the opioid litigation to explore the three most common sets of objections to public nuisance: (1) traditionalist, (2) formalist, and (3) institutional. Public nuisance can seem unusual, even outlandish. At worst, it is a potentially capacious mechanism allowing executive branch actors to employ the judicial process to address legislative and regulatory problems. Nevertheless, its perils are easily overstated and its promise overlooked.
California Supreme Court Looks to Restatement 3rd Torts: Economic Harm
The California Supreme Court looked to § 3 of the Restatement of the Law Third, Torts: Liability for Economic Harm in a case involving the examination of the Economic Loss Rule.
U.S. Supreme Court Dissent Cites Restatements Third and Second of Torts
Dissenting Associate Justice Samuel Alito cites the Restatement Third of Torts: Liability for Economic Harm § 28 and Restatement Second of Torts § 876.
Maryland Court of Appeals Adopts Section of Torts 3d: Liability for Economic Harm
In Barclay v. Castruccio, 230 A.3d 80 (Md. 2020), the Court of Appeals of Maryland decided to recognize the tort of intentional interference with a prospective inheritance or gift, and to adopt the standards for that tort as set forth in Restatement of the Law Third, Torts: Liability for Economic Harm § 19.
Restatement of the Law Third, Torts: Liability for Economic Harm – Now Available
Restatement of the Law Third, Torts: Liability for Economic Harm, completes the fourth installment of the Restatement Third of Torts. This Restatement, for which Dean Ward Farnsworth of the University of Texas at Austin School of Law served as Reporter, covers four principal areas of tort law: unintentional infliction of economic loss, liability for fraud, interference with economic interests, and misuse of legal procedure.
Cal. Supreme Court Cites Restatement 3d Torts: Liability for Economic Harm
The California Supreme Court cited the Restatement of the Law Third, Torts: Liability for Economic Harm in its recent decision involving the issue of whether a gas company had a tort duty to guard against purely economic losses.