Apologies and Litigation (draft Jan. 2009; forthcoming in COURT REVIEW)
نویسنده
چکیده
When one person allegedly injures another, he or she will often attempt to provide an account for the conduct that led to the injury. Specifically, he or she might attempt to disavow, explain, excuse, or justify the behavior that purportedly led to the injury. Alternately, he or she might offer an apology to the injured person. Apologies can be distinguished from other forms of accounting in that they acknowledge responsibility for the conduct that caused the harm. Accepting blame and expressing regret for one‘s behavior signals a recognition of the norm or rule that was violated and of the harm caused to the other. 1
منابع مشابه
No role for apology: remedial work and the problem of medical injury.
The past decade has produced ample evidence that patients are injured by medical care. A landmark document “To Err is Human” articulated a way to protect patients based on analysis of health care organizations according to complex systems and principles of human performance rather than “blame and shame”. To understand how to prevent injury, full – but protected – disclosure is required as well ...
متن کاملAdministrative Litigations in Iran and France
Administrative litigation is one of the most important issues of administrative law. The purpose of distinguishing between different types of administrative litigations is to explain the judicial procedures relating to each other. According to one of the most important classifications, proposed by Edouard Laferrière in the late nineteenth century and despite criticisms has retained its importan...
متن کاملJackpot Justice: The Value of Inefficient Litigation
Litigation seems to be a Pareto-inefficient outcome of pretrial bargaining; however, this paper shows that litigation can be the outcome of rational behavior by a litigant and her attorney. If the attorney has more information than his client concerning the characteristics of the lawsuit, the client can use litigation as a way of extracting information. I show that, counterintuitively, litigati...
متن کاملRemaking the United States Supreme Court in the Courts’ of Appeals Image Draft (January 2009 Version)
Introduction I. The Case for Capacity A. Clarity B. Consistency C. Checks and Balances D. Summary II. Proposal to Expand Court Capacity A. Expand the Court 1. Size 2. Implementation B. Adopt Panel Decisionmaking C. Retain Limited En Banc Review III. Proposal Pros and Cons A. Potential Benefits 1. Credible Threat of Review 2. Entry and Exit 3. Court Composition 4. Court Cohesion 5. Judicial Educ...
متن کاملWhen cows fly: expanding cognizable injury-in-fact and interest group litigation.
This Note takes an in-depth look at standing and, specifically, the extent to which increased risk of exposure to toxins caused by a government agency's regulations constitutes a judicially cognizable injury-in-fact. Despite over a century of case law on the topic, standing doctrine remains in flux and ill defined, largely due to the constantly changing ideological makeup of the U.S. Supreme Co...
متن کاملذخیره در منابع من
با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید
عنوان ژورنال:
دوره شماره
صفحات -
تاریخ انتشار 2009