If one denies the deterrent effect of tort law, presumably one also denies an essential purpose of the civil justice system: the promotion of safety.
To the extent there is a debate regarding the deterrent effect of tort law, (55) it is difficult to see how that debate has any traction when it comes to punitive damages.
Early in the tort reform debate, Jane Mallor and Barry Roberts surveyed punitive damages and concluded that "[i]nflicting punishment for past acts .
Thus, tort damage awards can exert a regulatory effect, (i.
73) About twenty-five years ago, scholarship began to appear suggesting that the tort system was problematic.
Part of this attack was based on the fact that "it is extremely difficult to find any empirical evidence that the tort system produces deterrence.
Some commentators note that tort damages generally and punitive damages specifically have a limited effect on corporations and publicly traded companies because the damage award fails to affect the individual decision-makers but instead punishes shareholders.
Finally, questions are raised regarding the overall credibility of the tort system.
to expose problems with the leading accounts of tort.
adequate corrective justice account of tort, we must revise our
is an invitation to broaden tort theory, not an effort to end it.
teaches Potter that tort law aims to minimize the sum of the costs of
features of tort law, and he finds the normative theory underpinning it
account of tort law, the more disenchanted he becomes with tort law
compensable by the tort system (say, by flying carelessly and knocking