Reviewing the Law Reviews
Youngdale, Elizabeth M., Defense Counsel Journal
Law Review Highlights:
The internet provides a unique, although increasing less so, venue for a person to express an opinion or share information that is potentially hurtful to others. As this format becomes commonplace, the challenge of applying law that has been print-bound until recently becomes more urgent. Whether the internet requires new laws or simply a different application of existing laws is a question several articles address in the area of defamation.
In his article Defamatory Internet Speech: A Defense of the Status Quo, Anthony Ciolli responds to Glenn Reynolds's assertion that internet speech--particularly blog speech--should be treated as slander instead of libel in defamation cases. (1) Specifically, the article argues against the reasoning Reynolds uses to support his proposal. Reynolds supposes that internet speech is more like the spoken word than a written publication. Ciolli counters that this view is unfounded and could cause significant harm to those who use and are impacted by the blogosphere. Ciolli proposes maintaining the status quo when it comes to regulating defamatory speech on the internet for several reasons, primarily based on distinctions between journalistic blogs--like Mr. Reynolds's own--and the diary blogs of ordinary people who write with less concern about readership than those who write with the purpose of producing journalism or scholarship. Ciolli concludes that, though there is legitimate criticism for applying defamatory law as it currently stands to internet speech, the status quo has done a good job of balancing free speech with the need to compensate those who have been harmed by false statements, and that it will continue to do so in an online setting.
A second article, Freezing the Net: Rejecting a One-Size-Fits-All Standard for Unmasking Anonymous Internet Speakers in Defamation Cases, suggests that there should be a different standard for unmasking anonymous speakers in defamation cases involving political speech on the internet. (2) Although the internet provides an easy outlet for the expression of political views without attaching a name to the opinion, it also provides the means to reveal the identities of those people who have posted comments anonymously. Increasingly, suits are asking courts to reveal those identities in defamation cases. In his note, Ryan Martin looks at the interplay between First Amendment protections of anonymous political speech and the right of the state to restrict potentially harmful communications. The note analyzes the reasoning people have for speaking anonymously on political matters as well as Supreme Court jurisprudence regarding regulation of political speech. Ultimately, the author concludes that courts should apply a higher standard, requiring a showing that the plaintiff can likely prove actual malice at trial, to succeed in a motion to identify anonymous political internet speakers. Otherwise, the overall effect of such suits may be to chill political speech online.
Taking defamation law to the next level, Bettina Chin, in her note Regulating Your Second Life: Defamation in Virtual Worlds, looks at the law in relation to an environment that is exclusively online. (3) "Second Life" is a multi-player/multimedia online role-playing game that has its own self-sustaining economy based on transactions in its virtual community. Real-life music groups have given concerts and legitimate politicians have held interviews. Companies like Nike "sell" clothing and marketers from Toyota have used Second Life as a virtual testing ground for advertising. In her article, the author analyzes some of the legal issues that have arisen in this online world and considers a hypothetical defamation case that would bridge the gap between virtual and real worlds. Her conclusion is that courts should overcome any reluctance to apply real-world defamation law to the virtual-world to provide citizens in the metaverse with the same protections they enjoy in reality.
The following list is a selective bibliography of current law review literature thought to be of interest to civil defense counsel.
U.S. and International
Richard C. E. Beck, Treble Damages in National Health Service Corps Contracts, Public Policy, and Hawronsky v. Commissioner, 22 AKRON TAX J. 129 (2007).
Jeff Berryman, Accommodating Ethnic and Cultural Factors in Damages for Personal Injury, 40 UBC L. REV. 1 (2007).
Scott S. Evans, Note, Dynamic Incentives: Improving the Safety, Effectivity, and Availability of Medical Products Through Progressively Increasing Damage Caps for Manufacturers, 2007 U. ILL. L. REV. 1069.
John Y. Gotanda. Charting Developments Concerning Punitive Damages: Is the Tide Changing?, 45 COLUM. J. TRANSNAT'L L. 507 (2007).
Julian Gyngell, Winning the Infringement War but Losing the Battle for Damages--A Case Study for Trademark Litigants, 2 J. INTELL. PROP. L. 198 (2007).
Jerry A. Hausman, et al., Patent Damages and Real Options: How Judicial Characterization of Noninfringing Alternatives Reduces Incentives to Innovate, 22 BERKELEY TECH. L.J. 825 (2007).
Basil Markesinis & Jorg Fedtke, Damages for the Negligence of Statutory Bodies: The Empirical and Comparative Dimension to an Unending Debate, 2007 PUB. L. 299.
Leah R. Mervine, Comment, Bridging the "Philosophical Void" in Punitive Damages: Empowering Plaintiffs and Society Through Curative Damages, 54 BUFF. L. REV. 1587 (2007).
Annette Morris, Spiralling or Stabilising? The Compensation Culture and Our Propensity to Claim Damages for Personal Injury, 70 MOD. L. REV. 349 (2007).
Ralph Peeples, Learning to Crawl: The Use of Voluntary Caps on Damages in Medical Malpractice Litigation, 56 DEF. L.J. 95 (2007).
Anthony J. Sebok, Punitive Damages: From Myth to Theory, 92 IOWA L. REV. 957 (2007).
Brendan Sweeney, The Role of Damages in Regulating Horizontal Price-Fixing: Comparing the Situation in the United States, Europe and Australia, 30 MELB. U. L. REV. 837 (2006).
Gregory A. Thorpe, River East Plaza: Liquidated Damages Analysis Applies to Prepayment Premium, 42 REAL PROP. PROB. & TR. J. 41 (2007).
Charles Tompkins, Damages Issues in Fair Labor Standards Act, Collective Action Litigation, 10 EMP. RTS. & EMP. POL'Y J. 475 (2006).
Russell J. Weintraub, Choice of Law for Quantification of Damages: A Judgment of the House of Lords Makes a Bad Rule Worse, 43 TEX. INT'L L.J. 311 (2007).
Salvatore J. Bauccio, Comment, E-Discovery: Why and How E-mail Is Changing the Way Trials Are Won and Lost, 45 DUQ. L. REV. 269 (2007).
Ian Binnie, Science in the Courtroom: The Mouse That Roared, 56 U.N.B. L.J. 307 (2007).
Basile Chiasson, Litigation Privilege and Disclosure of Expert's File, 56 U.N.B. L.J. 208 (2007).
Stacey L. Cohen, EchoStar and Its Progeny: Why the Attorney-Client Privilege May Be in Jeopardy, 16 FED. CIR. B.J. 465 (2007).
Gregory B. Collins & Andrew F. Halaby, Of "Purposes Not Prohibited": New Federal Rule of Evidence 408(B), 40 CREIGHTON L. REV. 679 (2007).
David Crump, The Case for Selective Abolition of the Rules of Evidence, 35 HOFSTRA L. REV. 585 (2006).
Laura B. Grubbs, Something's Gotta Give." The Conflict Between Evidence Rule 407 and the Feasible Alternative Design Requirement, 45 BRANDEIS L.J. 781 (2007).
Robert D. Kolar, Scientific and Other Expert Testimony: Understand It; Keep It out; Get It in, 57 FDCC Q. 207 (2007).
Robert M. Lloyd, Proving Lost Profits After Daubert: Five Questions Every Court Should Ask Before Admitting Expert Testimony, 56 DEF. L.J. 1 (2007).
Meloney Cargil Perry, Attorney-Client Privilege and Deposition Preparation of Former Employees, 57 FDCC Q. 303 (2007).
Philip G. Peters, Doctors and Juries, 105 MICH. L. REV. 1453 (2007).
Paul R. Rice, Evolving Evidentiary Needs: A Neglected Responsibility, 35 HOFSTRA L. REV. 657 (2006).
Ian S. Spechler, Note, Physicians at the Gates of Daubert: A Look at the Admissibility of Differential Diagnosis Testimony to Show External Causation in Toxic Tort Litigation, 26 REV. LITIG. 739 (2007).
Robert A. Weninger, Amended Federal Rule of Evidence 408: Trapping the Unwary, 26 REV. LITIG. 401 (2007).
David R. Wolfe, Comment, Future of Selective Waiver of Attorney-Client Privilege and Work-Product Protection After Qwest, 46 WASHBURN L.J. 479 (2007).
Masamichi Yamamoto, Note, How Can Japanese Corporations Protect Confidential Information in U.S. Courts? Recognition of the Attorney-Client Privilege for Japanese Non-Bengoshi In-House Lawyers in the Development of a New Legal System, 40 VAND. J. TRANSNAT'L L. 503 (2007).
Alberto Luis Zuppi, The Parol Evidence Rule: A Comparative Study of the Common Law, the Civil Law Tradition, and Lex Mercatoria, 35 GA. J. INT'L & COMP. L. 233 (2007).
Helen Johnson Alford & Gabrielle Reeves Pringle, Homeowner's Insurance: Additional Living Expenses--The Insurer's Ounce of Prevention, 57 FDCC Q. 267 (2007).
Tom Baker & Sean J. Griffith, Predicting Corporate Governance Risk: Evidence from the Directors' & Officers' Liability Insurance Market, 74 U. CHI. L. REV. 487 (2007).
Renat I. Bekkin, Islamic Insurance: National Features and Legal Regulation, 21 ARAB L.Q. 3 (2007).
Beth A. Brunalli, Note, Anorexia Killed Her, but the System Failed Her: Does the American Insurance System Suffer from Anorexia?, 12 CONN. INS. L.J. 583 (2006).
Steven E. Goldman, Litigating Marine Insurance Warranties: Once More into the Breach, 57 FDCC Q. 111 (2007).
Howard C. Kunreuther & Erwann O. Michel-Kerjan, Climate Change, Insurability of Large-Scale Disasters, and the Emerging Liability Challenge, 155 U. PA. L. REV. 1795 (2007).
Quynh T. Pham, Note, The Future of the National Flood Insurance Program in the Aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, 12 CONN. INS. L.J. 629 (2006).
Oscar Shub & Robert Carey, Recent Developments in Political Risk Insurance in the Asia Pacific Region: An Antipodean Perspective, 57 FDCC Q. 281 (2007).
Catherine Spain, Note, Reasonable Expectations in the Sphere of Liberty: A Theory of Accidental Death Insurance Coverage, 12 CONN. INS. L.J. 657 (2006).
Jeffrey W. Stempel, Assessing the Coverage Carnage: Asbestos Liability and Insurance After Three Decades of Dispute, 12 CONN. INS. L.J. 349 (2006).
Susan M. Wolf & Jeffrey P. Kahn, Genetic Testing and the Future of Disability Insurance: Ethics, Law and Policy, 35 J.L. MED. & ETHICS $6 (2007).
Darryl J. Adams & Victoria Wicken, Permanent Injunctions After Ebay v. Mercexchange: The Year in Review, 15 TEX. INTELL. PROP. L.J. 417 (2007).
Jed J. Borghei, Class Action Fairness: A Mature Solution to the 23(b)(3) Choice of Law Problem, 95 GEO. L.J. 1645 (2007).
John Bronsteen, Against Summary Judgment, 75 GEO. WASH. L. REV. 522 (2007).
Joann K. Coston, Embrace the New, but Don't Forget About the Old: Asserting Personal Jurisdiction over the New Internet Age, 34 S.U.L. REV. 249 (2007).
Daniel H. Erskine, Reforming Federal Personal Injury Litigation by Incorporation of the Procedural Innovations of Scotland and Ireland: An Analysis and Proposal, 15 CARDOZO J. INT'L & COMP. L. 1 (2007).
David U Horan, Appealing Remand Orders Under the Class Action Fairness Act, 8 J. APP. PRAC. & PROCESS 281 (2006).
Edward L. Jones III, Note, Stop in the Name of Arbitration: Should Trial in District Court Continue While the Court of Appeals Decides Arbitrability?, 92 IOWA L. REV. 1107 (2007).
Kevin C. Kennedy, Closing Argument: Through the Eyes of a Trial Advocate, 30 AM. J. TRIAL ADVOC. 593 (2007).
Elizabeth Lawrence, See You in Court, but Which Court? Venue in Title VII Class Actions, 10 EMP. RTS. & EMP. POL'Y J. 639 (2006).
Douglas D. McFarland, In Search of the Transaction or Occurrence: Counterclaims, 40 CREIGHTON L. REV. 699 (2007).
Michael L. Moffitt, Customized Litigation: The Case for Making Civil Procedure Negotiable, 75 GEO. WASH. L. REV. 461 (2007).
LaDonte A. Murphy, Access to Appellate Review: Writs, Appeals, and Interlocutory Judgments, 34 S.U.L. REV. 27 (2007).
Daniel R. Murray, et al., Discovery in a Digital Age: Electronically Stored Information and the New Amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, 39 UCC L.J. 509 (2007). < http://west.thomson.com/ product/14938739/product.asp>
Andrew Muscato, The Preliminary Injunction in Business Litigation, 3 N.Y.U. J.L. & Bus. 649 (2007).
William B. Rubenstein, Finality in Class Action Litigation: Lessons from Habeas, 82 N.Y.U. L. REV. 790 (2007).
Isil Yildiz, Note, Standing First: Addressing the Article III Standing Defects of Rule 23(b)(3) Class Actions Composed Wholly of Future Claimants, 26 REV. LITIG. 773 (2007).
Richard Ausness, Conspiracy Theories: Is There a Place for Civil Conspiracy in Products Liability Litigation?, 74 TENN. L. REV. 383 (2007).
David M. Bell, Focus on the Insuring Clause: Elements As They Relate to Construction Defect Claims, 57 FDCC Q 315 (2007).
Daniel R. Cahoy, Medical Product Information Incentives and the Transparency Paradox, 82 IND. L.J. 623 (2007).
Richard L. Cupp, Jr. & Christopher L. Frost, Successor Liability for Defective Products: A Redesign Ongoing, 72 BROOK. L. REV. 1173 (2007).
Glenna Novack, Note, Lawsuits in the Fast-Food Nation: Will Fast-Food Suits Succeed As Obesity Becomes an American Tradition?, 52 WAYNE L. REV. 1307 (2006).
David G. Owen, Inherent Product Hazards, 56 DEF. L.J. 49 (2007).
Robert Peltz & Carol Finklehoffe, Sea Food--Who Is Liable for a Bad Catch? An Analysis of a Ship Owner's Liability for Claims of Food Poisoning, 19 U.S.F. MAR. L.J. 121 (2007).
Robert R. Willis, Strict Products Liability and Hospitals: Liability of the Modern Hospital and the Use of Surgically Implanted Medical Products, Tools, and Prosthetic Devices, 35 W. ST. U. L. REV. 191 (2007).
T. Leigh Anenson, Lawsuits Against Litigators? Try Tortious Interference, 57 FDCC Q. 255 (2007).
Barry Goldstein, Ethical Issues in the Strategy for Preparing and Litigating an Employment Discrimination Class Action, 10 EMP. RTS. & EMP. POL'Y J. 505 (2006).
H. L. Ho, Legal Professional Privilege and the Integrity of Legal Representation, 9 LEGAL ETHICS 163 (2006).
Katherine Villareal Lizardo, Plaintiffs' Multiple Recoveries in Legal Malpractice Claims: Blurring the Principles of Deterrence and Equitable Judgment, 35 Sw. U. L. REV. 529 (2007).
Don Peters, When Lawyers Move Their Lips: Attorney Truthfulness in Mediation and a Modest Proposal, 2007 J. DISP. RESOL. 119.
Douglas R. Richmond, Why Legal Ethics Rules Are Relevant to Lawyer Liability, 38 ST. MARY'S L.J. 929 (2007).
Brian Roberson, Comment, Let's Get Together: An Analysis of the Applicability of the Rules of Professional Conduct to Collaborative Law, 2007 J. DISP. RESOL. 255.
James M. Anderson, The Missing Theory of Variable Selection in the Economic Analysis of Tort Law, 2007 UTAH L. REV. 255.
Russell Brown, Assumption of Responsibility and Loss of Bargain in Tort Law, 29 DALHOUSIE L.J. 345 (2006).
Alan Calnan, The Fault(s) in Negligence Law, 25 QUINNIPIAC L. REV. 695 (2007).
Martha Chamallas, Discrimination and Outrage: The Migration from Civil Rights to Tort Law, 48 WM. & MARY L. REV. 2115 (2007).
Erwin Chemerinsky, Injunctions in Defamation Cases, 57 SYRACUSE L. REV. 157 (2007).
Bettina M. Chin, Note, Regulating Your Second Life: Defamation in Virtual Worlds, 72 BROOK. L. REV. 1303 (2007).
Anthony Ciolli, Defamatory Internet Speech: A Defense of the Status Quo, 25 QUINNIPIAC L. REV. 853 (2007).
Thomas Connor, Comment, Genetically Modified Torts: Enlisting the Tort System to Regulate Agricultural Contamination by Biotech Crops, 75 U. CIN. L. REV. 1187 (2007).
Elizabeth D. De Armond, Frothy Chaos: Modern Data Warehousing and OldFashioned Defamation, 41 VAL. U. L. REV. 1061 (2007).
Lucien J. Dhooge, A Modest Proposal to Amend the Alien Tort Statute to Provide Guidance to Transnational Corporations, 13 U.C. DAVIS J. INT'L L. & POL'Y 119 (2007).
Emeka Duruigbo, Exhaustion of Local Remedies in Alien Tort Litigation: Implications for International Human Rights Protection, 29 FORDHAM INT'L L.J. 1245 (2006).
Jean Macchiaroli Eggen, Toxic Torts at Ground Zero, 39 ARIZ. ST. L.J. 383 (2007).
Lisa Gentile, Parental Civil Liability for the Torts of Minors, 16 J. CONTEMP. LEGAL ISSUES 125 (2007).
Jamie A. Grodsky, Genomics and Toxic Torts: Dismantling the Risk-Injury Divide, 59 STAR. L. REV. 1671 (2007).
William G. Hagans, Who Does the First Amendment Protect?: Why the Plaintiff Should Bear the Burden of Proof in Any Defamation Action, 26 REV. LING. 613 (2007).
F. Patrick Hubbard, The Nature and Impact of the "Tort Reform" Movement, 35 HOFSTRA L. REV. 437 (2006).
David Hunter & James Salzman, Negligence in the Air: The Duty of Care in Climate Change Litigation, 155 U. PA. L. REV. 1741 (2007).
John J. Kircher, The Four Faces of Tort Law: Liability for Emotional Harm, 90 MARQ. L. REV. 789 (2007).
Kathryn Walker Lyles, Note, Suit Your Spouse: Tort and Third Party Liability Arising from Divorce Actions, 30 AM. J. TRIAL ADVOC. 609 (2007).
Larry Lyon, et al., Straight from the Horse's Mouth: Judicial Observations of Jury Behavior and the Need for Tort Reform, 59 BAYLOR L. REV. 419 (2007).
Timothy D. Lytton, Clergy Sexual Abuse Litigation: The Policymaking Role of Tort Law, 39 CONN. L. REV. 809 (2007).
Ryan M. Martin, Comment, Freezing the Net: Rejecting a One-Size-Fits-All Standard for Unmasking Anonymous Internet Speakers in Defamation Lawsuits, 75 U. CIN. L. REV. 1217 (2007).
Lincoln Mayer, Note, Immunity for Immunizations: Tort Liability, Biodefense, and Bioshield II, 59 STAN. L. REV. 1753 (2007).
Olivera Medenica & Kaiser Wahab, Does Liability Enhance Credibility?: Lessons from the DMCA Applied to Online Defamation, 25 CARDOZO ARTS & ENT. L.J. 237 (2007).
Frank Christian Olah, MNC Liability for International Human Rights Violations Under the Alien Tort Claims Act: A Review & Analysis of the Fundamental Jurisprudence and a Look at Aiding and Abetting Liability Under the Act, 25 QUINNIPIAC L. REV. 751 (2007).
Joseph Oluwole, Hand Rule, Negligence and Public Adoption Agencies, 32 U. DAYTON L. REV. 255 (2007).
Candice E. Renka, Note, The Presumed Eggshell Plaintiff Rule: Determining Liability When Mental Harm Accompanies Physical Injury, 29 Y. JEFFERSON L. REV. 289 (2007).
Kate Riggs, et al., Note, Prolonged Mental Harm: The Torturous Reasoning Behind a New Standard for Psychological Abuse, 20 HARV. HUM. RTS. J. 263 (2007).
Elizabeth P. Stedman, Comment, Myspace, but Whose Responsibility? Liability of Social-Networking Websites When Offline Sexual Assault of Minors Follows Online Interaction, 14 VILE. SPORTS & ENT. L.J. 363 (2007).
L. Darnell Weeden, Hurricane Katrina and the Toxic Torts Implications of Environmental Injustice in New Orleans, 40 J. MARSHALL L. REV. 1 (2006).
Anthea Williams, Government Litigation and Settlement of Health Care Tort Claims." A Framework for Consistency and Management of Legal Risk, 22 N.Z.U.L. REV. 511 (2007).
(1) Anthony Ciolli, Defamatory Internet Speech: A Defense of the Status Quo, 25 QUINNIPIAC L. REV. 853 (2007).
(2) Ryan M. Martin, Comment, Freezing the Net: Rejecting a One-Size-Fits-All Standard for Unmasking Anonymous Internet Speakers in Defamation Lawsuits, 75 U. CIN. L. REV. 1217 (2007).
(3) Bettina M. Chin, Note, Regulating Your Second Life: Defamation in Virtual Worlds, 72 BROOK. L. REV. 1303 (2007).
Compiled by Elizabeth M. Youngdale
University of Texas School of Law…
Questia, a part of Gale, Cengage Learning. www.questia.com
Publication information: Article title: Reviewing the Law Reviews. Contributors: Youngdale, Elizabeth M. - Author. Journal title: Defense Counsel Journal. Volume: 74. Issue: 4 Publication date: October 2007. Page number: 394+. © 1999 International Association of Defense Counsels. COPYRIGHT 2007 Gale Group.
This material is protected by copyright and, with the exception of fair use, may not be further copied, distributed or transmitted in any form or by any means.