1answer.
Ask question
Login Signup
Ask question
All categories
  • English
  • Mathematics
  • Social Studies
  • Business
  • History
  • Health
  • Geography
  • Biology
  • Physics
  • Chemistry
  • Computers and Technology
  • Arts
  • World Languages
  • Spanish
  • French
  • German
  • Advanced Placement (AP)
  • SAT
  • Medicine
  • Law
  • Engineering
pav-90 [236]
2 years ago
15

WILL MARK BRAINLIEST!!! 100 POINTS!!! For this project, you have the opportunity to be the author and write brief newspaper arti

cles based on the torts discussed in this lesson: strict liability, products liability, misrepresentation of a product, and public and private nuisance. In the article you write, include some points about the defenses and remedies available for each tort. This exercise should be at least two to three paragraphs per tort (about 800 words in length total).
Law
1 answer:
LUCKY_DIMON [66]2 years ago
3 0

Answer:

Manufacturers are used to defending strict product liability actions when plaintiffs claim that their products are defective. But in the opioid litigation, plaintiffs have filed something else: more than 2,500 public nuisance cases so far.

Governmental entities across the country are filing suits alleging that opioid manufacturers deceptively marketed their legal, opioid-based pain medications to understate the medication’s addictive qualities and to overstate its effectiveness in treating pain. In addition, plaintiffs allege that opioid distributors failed to properly monitor how frequently the medication was prescribed and failed to stop filling prescription orders from known “pill mills.” The complaints claim that manufacturer defendants’ deceptive marketing schemes and distributor defendants’ failure to monitor led more people to become addicted to painkillers, which led to people turning to illegal opioids. The legal argument here is that the defendants’ actions in concert interfered with an alleged public right against unwarranted illness and addition. But is public nuisance law likely to be a successful avenue for prosecuting these types of mass tort claims? It has not been in the past.

This is the first of two posts that will address how plaintiffs have historically used public nuisance law to prosecute mass tort claims and how the plaintiffs in the current opioid litigation may fare.

Overview of Public Nuisance Law

In most states, a public nuisance is “an unreasonable interference with a right common to the general public.”[1] This definition is often broken down into four elements: (1) the defendant’s affirmative conduct caused (2) an unreasonable interference (3) with a right common to the general public (4) that is abatable.

Courts have interpreted these elements in different ways. For example, courts in Rhode Island and California have disagreed about when a public nuisance is abatable: the Rhode Island Supreme Court held that this element is satisfied only if the defendant had control over what caused the nuisance when the injury occurred, while the a California Court of Appeal held that the plaintiff need not prove this element at all.[2] And while the federal district court in Ohio handling the opioid multidistrict litigation (MDL) has held that the right to be free from unwarranted addiction is a public right,[3] the Supreme Court of Illinois held that the right to be “free from unreasonable jeopardy to health” is a private right and cannot be the basis of a public nuisance claim.[4]

Roots of Public Nuisance Law in Mass Tort Cases

Plaintiffs litigating mass tort cases have turned to public nuisance law over the past decades. In the 1980s and 1990s, plaintiffs unsuccessfully attempted to use it to hold asbestos manufacturers liable.[5] In one case, plaintiffs alleged that defendants created a nuisance by producing an asbestos-laced product that caused major health repercussions for a portion of the population. Plaintiffs argued that North Dakota nuisance law did not require defendants to have the asbestos-laced products within their control when the injury to the consumer occurred. Explicitly rejecting this theory, the Eighth Circuit held that North Dakota nuisance law required the defendant to have control over the product and found that defendant in the case before it did not have control over the asbestos-laced products because when the injury occurred, the products had already been distributed to consumers. The Eighth Circuit warned that broadening nuisance law to encompass these claims “would in effect totally rewrite” tort law, morphing nuisance law into “a monster that would devour in one gulp the entire law of tort.”[6]

You might be interested in
What is environmental studies??
andrew11 [14]

Answer:

another fake id of someone who put same pfp as u.

and name also

or it can be ur id.

7 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
What did the judge revoke or deny derek chauvin?
Ivenika [448]

Answer:

The judge revoked Derek Chauvin's bail and said he would be sentenced in eight weeks. ... Chauvin was convicted on all three charges he faced at trial — second-degree murder, third-degree murder and second-degree manslaughter

6 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
What do we call the study of the ways in which money is created and used in society?
DiKsa [7]
The answer is economics
5 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
How did the british need for revenue correlate to its eroding relationship with the colonies
Mumz [18]

Answer:

Britain needed money from the seven years war and decided to tax the colonies more than previously. The British government decided to tax the imported resources the American Colonies needed like Tea.

Explanation:

7 0
3 years ago
Which of the following might be considered government "red tape"? (Select all that apply.)
Semenov [28]

The options considered as government "Red Tape" are as follows:

<em>a. The requirement that a person seeking a driver's license fill out six forms of similar content.</em>

<em> </em>

<em>c. The requirement that to build a fence in front of a home, three separate city departments must be involved.</em>

"Red Tape" refers to the tendencies of government departments and agencies demanding <em>excessive official routines or procedures</em>. This system makes a process take much longer than it should. "Red Tape" involves various procedures, forms, or rules that may not make sense to the ordinary citizen.

Thus, the options that are considered to be government "red tape" are <em>Options (a) and (c).</em>

Learn more about "Red Tape" as governmental procedures here: brainly.com/question/956399

6 0
3 years ago
Other questions:
  • How does a well-implemented safety and health program effect employee retention?
    9·1 answer
  • Please help.....ASAP
    12·2 answers
  • Randi, a resident of Oregon, was involved in an auto accident while in Idaho. The other party lives in Wyoming. Randi wishes to
    12·1 answer
  • What type of law regulates government bureaucracies?
    5·1 answer
  • Write a two-page paper which analyzes your responsibilities in relation to
    6·1 answer
  • 54. California's Compulsory Financial Responsibility Law:
    15·1 answer
  • Based on due process, which of these instructions would a judge give to the jury in a criminal trial?
    5·1 answer
  • Exam
    11·1 answer
  • Guess the anime character by their voice lines:<br> 1)SHINEEEEEE<br> 2)Datebayo
    8·1 answer
  • What is it called when a country uses changes to taxes and spending to influence the macroeconomy?
    12·1 answer
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!