From: Mårten Schultz <Marten.Schultz@juridicum.su.se>
To: Chaim Saiman <Saiman@law.villanova.edu>
obligations@uwo.ca
Date: 31/10/2009 08:38:48 UTC
Subject: SV: outlandish torts
Chaim,
 
from a Scandinavian perspective this type of cases are seen as very much an American thing. In fact also scholars and legislators often perceive "American tort law" to be something bizarre. The stereotypical image consists of the following parts: Huge punitive damages, juries moved by emotions rather than law, medical malpractice claims that cripple the health sector, and so on. In addition, the term "Americanization" is quite often used to picture a threat to the Scandinavian legal tradition of torts.
 
I have described the stereotypical views of the American tort systems as "legal orientalism" a couple of times, but no one seems to be that intrerested in facts. Myths like those surrounding the McDonalds case - as well as distorted views of real cases such as the Californian Ford case and the Sindell case - are deeply entrenched.
 
Personally I found the arguments in DisTorting the Law persuasive. (And first became aware of my prejudices when I read Richard Wright's comparative observations in his article Once More into the Bramble Bush.) 
 
I wrote something like a review of Haltom's and McCann's book here: http://martenschultz.wordpress.com/2007/08/07/berattelsen-om-stella-och-kaffet-pa-mcdonalds-och-andra-myter-om-amerikansk-skadestandsratt/ 

Från: Chaim Saiman [mailto:Saiman@law.villanova.edu]
Skickat: fr 2009-10-30 20:42
Till: obligations@uwo.ca
Ämne: outlandish torts

 

I have been following the emails of the past few days with some interest, and note that most of the examples (real and otherwise) are taken from the American context. Moreover, as one poster suggested, some of these hoaxes may be part of a concerted effort by activists on the American scene to paint a cartoonish picture of the American tort system in order to spur on political efforts at tort reform (limitation)

 

My question to this largely non-American audience is whether, from an international perspective, these sort s of suits are seen as uniquely (or typically) American, and if so, is it only on account of the jury, or are there other factors at work.

 

Would be interested in your thoughts.

 

--cs

 

Chaim Saiman

Associate Professor

Villanova Law School

610.519.3296

saiman@law.villanova.edu

http://ssrn.com/author=549545