Scope of liability: the vanishing distinction between negligence and strict liability

The duty-of-care requirement cannot be used anymore as the touchstone to differentiate negligence from strict liability because it can be found in many forms of the latter. Duty of care is smuggled into strict liability hidden under the scope of liability requirement (traditionally called “proximate causation”). As far as the scope of liability requirement is common to negligence and to many forms of strict liability, there is a fairly large common ground to both liability rules, and consequently the marginal Hand formula is applied to both rules. Indeed, under a negligence rule, the marginal Hand formula is applied twice: first to assess whether or not the defendant did breach his or her duty of care, and, second, to delimit whether or not the defendant’s behavior was a proximate cause of the harm suffered by the victim. However, under a strict liability rule, the Hand formula is applied only once when the proximate causation question is raised. Traditional law and economics analysis has almost always taken the normative question raised by the causation requirement as given, which is a potential major problem due to the importance of scope of liability or proximate causation in legal practice. Defining the scope of liability, that is to say, the boundaries of the pool of potential defendants, is the basic legal policy decision for each and every liability rule. In the normative model presented in this paper, the government first chooses efficient scope of liability, and given the scope of liability, the government then decides the liability rule and damages that guarantee efficient precaution. In the article, most known scope of liability rationales developed by both common law and civil law systems are discussed in order to show the substantial common ground between negligence and strict liability.     

A comparison of adolescent inpatients with and without substance abuse using the Millon Adolescent Clinical Inventory

We compared clinical syndromes, expressed concerns, and personality styles of adolescent inpatients with substance use disorders (SUD; n=44) vs. without substance use disorders (non-SUD; n=61) using the Millon Adolescent Clinical Inventory. The two groups did not differ with regard to age, sex, ethnicity, functional severity, or the frequency of other major psychiatric disorders, and were drawn from the same overall sample population. SUD subjects showed significantly higher levels of delinquent predisposition and lower levels of anxiety. Consistent with these syndromal findings, we found that SUD subjects were characterized by higher levels of unruliness and social insensitivity and lower levels of submissiveness. Our findings suggest that, in severely disturbed adolescents who require psychiatric hospitalization, externalizing phenomena are closely associated with SUD. Our findings also suggest that internalizing problems also exist in SUD, although not at levels greater than that observed in non-SUD inpatients.Received Ph.D. in clinical psychology from the University of Pittsburgh. Research interests include eating and weight disorders, addictive behaviors, behavioral medicine, psychological assessment, and psychiatric comorbidity.Received Psy.D. in clinical psychology from the University of Hartford. Research interests include psychological assessment, adolescent psychopathology, and psychiatric comorbidity.Received B.A. in Psychology from Swarthmore College. Research interests include perception, developmental psychopathology, and psychosis proneness.Received Ph.D. in clinical psychiatry from DePaul University. Research interests include the assessment and treatment of substance abusing psychiatric populations.     

Population data of nine STR loci,D3S1358, vWA,FGA, TH01, TPOX,CSF1PO,D5S818, D13S317 and D7S820, in Bangladeshis and Indonesians

Allele frequencies of nine short tandem repeat (STR) loci, D3S1358, vWA, FGA, TH01, TPOX, CSF1PO, D5S818, D13S317 and D7S820, were determined for 127 unrelated Bangladeshi individuals and 105 unrelated Indonesian individuals using the AmpFLSTR Profiler Kit. The genotype frequency distributions of the nine STR loci were in the Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium for both populations.     

Editors' Note

Note

Editors' Note