Use and misuse of epidemiologic data in the courtroom: defining the limits of inferential and particularistic evidence in mass tort litigation

Medical epidemiology is the cornerstone for understanding the safety and efficacy of drugs and medical devices. Epidemiologic principles provide a statistical basis for determining correlations, and ultimately mathematical causation, between two series of events. Medical epidemiologic evidence and statistical inferences are useful and are now routinely accepted in the courtroom. The complex distribution systems that provide fungible goods throughout the country often preclude the identification of the specific source of an allegedly defective product. An expansion of the principles established in Summers v. Tice and Ybarra v. Spangard provide a logical and rational means for the courts to address products liability issues in cases involving multiple and unnamed defendants. This Article discusses the impact of epidemiology on the judicial process, both in the nature of judicial decision-making and in the nature of the law itself. Part III B discusses the "weak" and "strong" versions of the traditional preponderance of the evidence rule, as recast by recent products liability litigation. The remainder of the Article defines the useful and appropriate scope of epidemiologic evidence, concluding that "intentless" epidemiologic evidence alone cannot support an award of punitive damages.     

Informational externalities and settlements in mass tort litigations

This paper elaborates on a basic model of mass tort litigation, highlighting the existence of positive informational externalities afforded by the discovery process (as a general technology of production of evidences) in order to study when a class action is formed, or when a sequence of individual trials is more likely. We illustrate the argument that when several plaintiffs file individually a lawsuit against the same tortfeasor, the resolution of the various cases through repeated trials produces positive informational externalities. When class actions are forbidden, these externalities only benefit to the later plaintiffs (through precedents, jurisprudence...). When they are allowed, the first filer may have an incentive to initiate a class action as far as it enables him to benefit from these externalities, through the sharing of information with later filers. We provide sufficient conditions under which a class action is formed, assuming a perfect discovery process. We also show that when contingent fees are used to reward attorneys’ services, plaintiffs become neutral to the arrival of new information on their case.     

Estimating liability risks with the media as your guide: A content analysis of media coverage of tort litigation

A content analysis of 249 articles fromTime, Newsweek, Fortune, Forbes, andBusiness Week during 1980–1990 examined the representativeness of popular media coverage of tort litigation. Compared to objective data on tort cases, the magazine articles considerably overrepresented the relative frequency of controversial forms of litigation (product liability and medical malpractice), the proportion of disputes resolved by trial (rather than settlement), the plaintiff victory rate at trial, and the median and mean jury awards. Psychological mechanisms by which biases in media coverage could affect the decision making of potential litigants are discussed. The results highlight the need for more systematic monitoring and dissemination of reliable data on tort outcomes.     

关于药品侵权的几点思考——一起注射疫苗过敏案件评析

药品侵权的构成以药品存在缺陷为前提;药品之缺陷应当包括设计缺陷、警示缺陷、制造缺陷3种情形;药品合格的证明标准是具体使用的药品本身不存在缺陷,而不是某个批次的药品具有合格证书;药品质量的证明责任应当由药品的生产者承担.     

关于药品侵权的几点思考--一起注射疫苗过敏案件评析

药品侵权的构成以药品存在缺陷为前提;药品之缺陷应当包括设计缺陷、警示缺陷、制造缺陷3种情形;药品合格的证明标准是具体使用的药品本身不存在缺陷,而不是某个批次的药品具有合格证书;药品质量的证明责任应当由药品的生产者承担.     

Causality and causation in tort law

This paper considers alternative approaches to dealing with causal uncertainty in strict liability tort regimes. Beginning from the philosophical literature on causing, a distinction is made between the scientific idea of causality and the legal idea of causation. This distinction is generalized to a context of causal uncertainty and associated probabilities are constructed. It is shown that a rule of proportional liability whereby the tortfeasor pays damages in proportion to the probability in causation of them having caused the damage would be socially efficient. This contrasts with the implied use of the probability in causality by the courts and in the law and economics literature on causal uncertainty.     

博客侵权问题研究

In recent years the cases of blog infringement are on the increase, attracting more attention from all walks of life. The author provides a preliminary discussion on the status, elements, and judicial finding of blog infringement, as well as civil liabilities for blog infringement, in the hope of contributing to the research and legislative regulation of blog infringement. Fang Yiquan is a professor and postgraduate supervisor of Law School of Wenzhou University, and a legal adviser of Wenzhou Municipal Government, whose main researches focus on civil law, commercial law and educational law. Professor Fang has been chosen as one of the “151 Talents of the New Century” of Zhejiang Province, one of the “Ten Outstanding Youths” in Wenzhou city, a “Prominent Educator” in Zhejiang Province. His scientific research achievements have received prefectural, provincial and ministerial rewards for over ten times. He has presided ten projects funded by the Humanities & Social Sciences of the Education Ministry of China and the Philosophy and Social Sciences of Zhejiang Province. He has released over 60 articles in academic law journals, such as Politics and Law Forum, Jurists Review, etc. His monographs include Compensation Liability of Student Injury Incidents, Research on Legal Problems of Campus Infringement, etc.