Replacing the Negligence Lottery: Compensation and Selective Reimbursement

Franklin, Marc A.

doi:10.2307/1071414

Cited by 13 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…41 Some have gone even further to urge the adoption of community responsibility. 42 Fleming has urged the advantages of comprehensive social insurance in every case of accident or illness disability, 43 whilst Ison 44 and Atiyah 45 (as regards U.K.) and Franklin 46 (as regards the U.S.A.) have advocated a scheme similar to that in New Zealand, provided that it covers illness disability, with Ison and Atiyah arguing that such a scheme should do away with the need for tort law in respect of personal injury.…”

Section: The Need For Community Responsibility In An Imperfect Societymentioning

confidence: 99%

The Problem of the Class Differentiation of Disability Benefits: A Case for Going Beyond the No-Fault Principle

Miller¹

1977

Isr. law rev.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In Israeli law eighteen statutes now regulate the legal status of various kinds of disabled persons. These statutes apply to about twice the number of different categories of disabled persons, classified in groups or classes, according to the cause and circumstances of disablement. Ignoring voluntary arrangements, the number of legal statuses or classifications (i.e. the complex of legal rights, pecuniary andin specie, together with the conditions of entitlement) may be put at eleven, which includes groups of people disabledde factowho are not recognised as disabled under law since they do not come within the statutory definition of disablement or otherwise meet the conditions of entitlement. The number of statuses is smaller than the number of statutes because some of the latter merely extend the application of other statutesin pari materia.If we address ourselves to the substance of the legal status of these disabled persons, the general impression obtained reflects a kind of order of preference among the different groups, sometimes with considerable gaps. At the lowest level are the most deprived, thede factodisabled, who lack all rights as such, and the ordinary disabled (those who do not fall into any specific category but are recognised as disabled—the “new” and “long-standing” invalids of Chapter 6B of the National Insurance Law (Consolidated Version), 1968, in respect of whom a paucity of rights exists, in the nature only ofultimum subsidium. At the upper level stand the most preferred groups under existing law, traffic-accident victims and disabled soldiers.

show abstract

Section: The Need For Community Responsibility In An Imperfect Societymentioning

confidence: 99%

The Problem of the Class Differentiation of Disability Benefits: A Case for Going Beyond the No-Fault Principle

Miller¹

1977

Isr. law rev.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…16 16 McCann and Haltom (2004) quite properly cite studies showing that the tort system tends to undercompensate plaintiffs with the most severe injuries (98), but they underemphasize research indicating that the system also often overcompensates plaintiffs with smaller and legally dubious claims (Rabin 1988, 34; Franklin 1967, 780; Munch 1977, 38–39; Bell and O’Connell 1997, 63–65). Frequent payment of settlements for questionable claims is repeatedly found by medical malpractice studies in which a panel of physicians, or physicians and lawyers, examines claim files to assess whether the defendants’ negligence had caused the claimed injuries (Cheney et al 1989, 1601–02; Metzloff 1993, 1181; Metzloff 1988; Farber and White 1991, 203–04; Sloan and Van Wert 1991, 131–68; Localio et al 1991; Thomas, et al 2000 (78 percent of malpractice claims in Colorado and Utah did not involve medical negligence, according to expert panel)).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%