Actually I dont think that the Pinto Case was one of a straightforward cost-benefit analysis and didnt even include matters such as the cost of lawsuits per se except perhaps indirectly since it included the cost of human lives and of injuries. The human life values were themselves based upon government figures.
----- Original Message ----- From: "Kenneth Campbell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, August 10, 2004 11:05 AM Subject: Re: [PEN-L] Economics and law > Charles wrote: > > >You are probably aware that many juries ( composed largely > >on North American workers) have given such high awards > >often that the rightwing has been carrying out tort > >"reform" for a while, whereby caps are put on the amounts. > > It was my understanding that many of these awards are severely reduced > on the appellate level... which does not involved juries (hence people > outside the law). > > There is a buffer there, too, no? > > (But you are right about the political agenda behind removing in the > initial awards.) > > >Left wing lawyers (Maurice Sugar and others) played a big > >role in developing products liability law. > > I do not currently know the development of product liability law. I > would imagine it came out of the early 1900s in the US. If you have any > more research, I would appreciate it. It would be helpful to put it in > context. > > Ken. > > -- > The future is something which everyone reaches at > the rate of 60 minutes an hour, whatever he does, > whoever he is. > -- C.S. Lewis
