Industrial calamities forced the creation of genuinely new tort law
Evidence
Existing tort law was simply not designed to deal with collisions, derailments, exploding boilers, and similar calamities. It had been devised with other situations in mind. American law had to work out on its own schemes to distribute the burden of railroad and steamboat accidents among workers, citizens, companies, and state. Because the job was new, the resulting law was also new. There was some continuity in phrasing, but this was in a way misleading. Tort law was new law in the nineteenth century. — Lawrence M. Friedman, A History of American Law, 1783
Categorization
- DEFINE: Defines what ‘new law’ means here — a distinct contrast with the older book theme that English doctrine survived by continuity (ch14).
- XREF: connects to: The discretionary-function exception replaced activity-specific carve-outs in 1942 tort bills — Henry M. Hart, Jr. and Albert M. Sacks, The Legal Process: Basic Problems in…, 2056; Nineteenth-century courts shifted tort law toward negligence to favor industrial growth — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 3405; Technological control over risk expanded legal rights and lawsuits (+2 more)
Broader Connections
- Nineteenth-century courts shifted tort law toward negligence to favor industrial growth
#expands(0.90) — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 3405 - Technological control over risk expanded legal rights and lawsuits
#exemplifies(0.85) - Industrialization created accidents and knowledge gaps that the old tort law ignored.
#expands(0.80) — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 3467 - The fault principle shielded industry from full liability to spare capital
#qualifies(0.80) — Lawrence M. Friedman, A History of American Law, 2686