About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline

LOG IN
LOG IN


Case Citations 1 (Spring 2025)

handle is hein.ali/restt5038 and id is 1 raw text is: THE AMERICAN LAW INSTITUTE Spring 2025 Citations TORTS 3D: APPORTIONMENT OF LIABILITY TOPIC 1. BASIC RULES OF COMPARATIVE RESPONSIBILITY Alaska, 2024. Topic 1 cit. in ftn. Children's services caseworker sued former employer, alleging that it wrongfully retaliated against her and forced her to resign after she reported its systemic failures to protect her from a client who assaulted her. The trial court entered judgment on a jury verdict awarding caseworker both economic and non-economic damages. This court vacated in part and remanded for a new trial on non-economic damages, holding that the trial court erroneously failed to instruct the jury to first determine the separate amounts of damage caused by the client's assault and employer's wrongful retaliation, and then award caseworker only the damages caused by employer. The court noted that, under the Restatement Third of Torts: Apportionment of Liability, there was a significant difference between allocating divisible damages among multiple causal incidents and allocating indivisible damages for each separate incident among multiple parties based on comparative fault. Department of Family & Community Services, Office of Children's Services v. Lane, 542 P.3d 1124, 1145. § 8. Factors for Assigning Shares of Responsibility Del.Ch.2024. Quot. in sup. and cit. in ftn., com. (c) quot. in sup. and cit. in ftn. Stockholders of a publicly traded utility filed a class action against utility's chief executive officer and chief financial officer for breach of fiduciary duty and against buyer of utility for aiding and abetting officers in breaching their fiduciary duties. The trial court approved a settlement between officers and stockholders. Following a bench trial, the trial court found buyer liable and awarded damages to stockholders. In response to the parties' briefs regarding buyer's entitlement to a settlement credit under the Delaware Uniform Contribution Among Tortfeasors Act, this court held that buyer, on one side of the transaction, and officers on the other side, were equally responsible for causing the harm incurred by stockholders during the sale. The court based its apportionment of liability on an analysis of factors set forth in Restatement Third of Torts: Apportionment of Liability § 8 which considered the risk-creating conduct of the joint tortfeasors and the causal connection between the conduct and the harm. In re Columbia Pipeline Group, Inc. Merger Litigation, 316 A.3d 359, 397, 398, 400. COPYRIGHT 02025 By THE AMERICAN LAW INSTITUTE All rights reserved Printed in the United States of America For earlier citations, see the Appendices, Supplements, or Pocket Parts, if any, that correspond to the subject matter under examination.