Justice luck in negligence law

  • Grady M
1Citations
Citations of this article
8Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

U.S. juries possess the power to forgive even obvious negligence and frequently exercise it. Judges and courts facilitate this disposition of cases by regularly affirming juries’ decisions to forgive negligence. This practice creates a problem for corrective justice theories of negligence, which commonly assert that the purpose of negligence law is to repair harm. This reparative purpose is not achieved in the many cases in which juries forgive negligence. In addition, juries impose negligence liability on many acts and omissions that are not wrongs in any moral sense. Negligence liability is best understood, not as a moral system, but as a “stochastic tax.” Someone whose negligence has been forgiven by a jury has experienced “justice luck.”

References Powered by Scopus

Harm and its moral significance

80Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Reasonableness and Rationality in Negligence Theory

71Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Principles of risk imposition and the priority of avoiding harm

7Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Cited by Powered by Scopus

Between absolutism and efficiency: Reply to professors Geistfeld, Grady, and Priel

1Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Grady, M. F. (2019). Justice luck in negligence law. Revus, (37). https://doi.org/10.4000/revus.4325

Readers' Seniority

Tooltip

PhD / Post grad / Masters / Doc 1

100%

Readers' Discipline

Tooltip

Nursing and Health Professions 1

50%

Social Sciences 1

50%

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free