Skip to content
Free planNo credit card requiredStart writing
AI for Research home
AI for Research home
Dashboard
Sign inGet started

Search 250 million research papers

Read the abstract, see who wrote it and who cites it, and get the citation in APA, MLA, Chicago or Harvard.

About 10,000 papers for “Liability”

Professional liability and potential liability

C A Fager · Neurosurgery · 1985

Operations on the nervous system continue to result in claims that rank among the most costly. A retrospective review of 300 cases of alleged or potential liability referred for opinion over an 11-year period is reported to catalog areas of vulnerability for the neurosurgeon and to alert younger practitioners in particular. Spinal surgery produced the largest single group of neurosurgical malpractice cases, 136 of the 300; among these, 71 came from operations on the lumbar spine. Cerebral and spinal trauma accounted for 54 cases, the next largest group. Subgroups were studied in detail and provide individual features of some importance. Other conclusions are that 37% of all cases reviewed were found to have some merit in favor of the claimant; plaintiffs and their attorneys can be dissuaded from legal pursuit if the deficit is not serious; many defensible cases are settled or lost on the basis of disability rather than merit; and some type of reform of the present system is clearly needed. (Neurosurgery 16:866-872, 1985)

Cited by 3

TORT LIABILITY FOR CONTRACTUAL LIABILITY

James Goudkamp, Eleni Katsampouka · The Cambridge Law Journal · 2025

Abstract This article addresses the doctrine of remoteness in tort in light of the Supreme Court’s landmark decision in Armstead v Royal & Sun Alliance Insurance Co. Ltd. Armstead further attenuates an already weak control on tortious liability. In outline, it does so in two ways: first, by establishing that contractual liabilities incurred as a result of tortiously caused property damage comprise non-remote damage provided that those liabilities represent a reasonable pre-estimate of the counterparty’s loss; and, secondly, by allocating the burden of proof in respect of remoteness to defendants. This article explores these rules. It contends, in particular, that the first collides with the fundamental principle that the extent of the claimant’s loss in tort is irrelevant to the issue of remoteness while the second means that, oddly, the onus of proof in relation to remoteness in tort differs from that in contract.

Cited by 0Open access

Is Cybersecurity Liability a Liability?

Steven M. Bellovin · IEEE Security & Privacy · 2023

One element of the Biden administration’s cybersecurity policy is liability for security failures. I’ve been saying for many years that this is an idea very much worth serious study—if implemented correctly, the market could work its magic and create incentives for software vendors to clean up their act. That said, there are a number of serious questions that have to be answered first—and the wrong answers could have a disastrous effect, both on innovation and on whether or not liability would actually work.

Cited by 2Open access

Liability: ‘No Liability, No Protocol’

Kate Cook · 2014

Principle 13 of the Rio Declaration proclaims that states shall ‘cooperate in an expeditious and more determined manner to develop further international law regarding liability and compensation for adverse effects of environmental damage caused by activities within their jurisdiction or control to areas beyond their jurisdiction’. The law on liability and compensation in this context essentially determines who will pay for the consequences of environmental damage. Liability and redress in the context of the protocol negotiations concerned the question of what would happen should the transboundary movement of living modified organisms (LMOs) result in damage. The protocol negotiations could be said to be pre-emptive in the sense that they were taking place in the absence of any specific known incidents of damage caused by the transboundary movement of LMOs. An argument often heard against the inclusion of provision for liability in the protocol was that it was unnecessary in view of the existence of general international principles on state responsibility.

Cited by 2

Professional Liability and Potential Liability

Charles A. Fager · Neurosurgery · 1985

Operations on the nervous system continue to result in claims that rank among the most costly. A retrospective review of 300 cases of alleged or potential liability referred for opinion over an 11-year period is reported to catalog areas of vulnerability for the neurosurgeon and to alert younger practitioners in particular. Spinal surgery produced the largest single group of neurosurgical malpractice cases, 136 of the 300; among these, 71 came from operations on the lumbar spine. Cerebral and spinal trauma accounted for 54 cases, the next largest group. Subgroups were studied in detail and provide individual features of some importance. Other conclusions are that 37% of all cases reviewed were found to have some merit in favor of the claimant; plaintiffs and their attorneys can be dissuaded from legal pursuit if the deficit is not serious; many defensible cases are settled or lost on the basis of disability rather than merit; and some type of reform of the present system is clearly needed.

Cited by 16

Liability

Jean-louis Seguineau, Security Extensions For Jabber/xmpp · 2016

Cited by 0

Liability

Andrea Parziale · CINECA IRIS Institutional Research Information System (Sant'Anna School of Advanced Studies) · 2022

Cited by 0

Liability

Major Ind, Edward Nissan · 2015

Abstract: This pape by line with a host o concentration ratio. most concentrated a concentration all oth he passage of concern about by the Clayton Ac foundation of ant Norman (1999), a b of antitrust cases. T structure ranging f on the other. The fra Performance (SCP emphasized charac strategic aspects o concentration, the entry.

Cited by 0

Liability

Robert Norris Chambers · Research Portal (King's College London) · 2002

Cited by 0

Liability

The MIT Press eBooks · 2024

Cited by 0

Liability

Richard A. Epstein · The Wiley-Blackwell Encyclopedia of Social Theory · 2017

This brief entry identifies the key choices of any tort system. The first question asks whether any given harm is “cognizable” at all. Typically physical injuries and interferences with advantageous relations by force or fraud fall into that category. Purely competitive injuries do not. Compensating for the former loss advances overall social welfare; for the latter does not. The entry then compares the desirability of strict liability and negligence for these cognizable injuries and argues that the strict liability system, subject to affirmative defenses based on assumption of risk or plaintiff's misconduct, outperforms a negligence system based either on reasonable foresight or some broad cost–benefit analysis. The negligence system, often defined by customary care, tends to be superior in consensual situations, such as medical malpractice, where it is too expensive for patients to fund a strict liability system.

Cited by 0

Liability

Richard C. Fries · 2019

The three most common theories of liability for which a manufacturer may be held liable for personal injury caused by its product are negligence, strict liability, and breach of warranty. These are referred to as common-law causes of action, which are distinct from causes of action based on federal or state statutory law. A plaintiff in a product liability action grounded in negligence, then, must establish a breach of the manufacturer’s or seller’s duty to exercise reasonable care in the manufacture and preparation of a product. Unlike the negligence suit, in which the focus is on the defendant’s conduct, in a strict liability suit, the focus is on the product itself. The law has always recognized that sellers may explicitly limit their liability upon a contract of sale by including disclaimers of any warranties under the contract. Determining defectiveness is one of the more difficult problems in products liability, particularly in design litigation.

Cited by 0

Liability

Shannon M.Barton-Bellessa · Encyclopedia of Community Corrections · 2012

Cited by 0