The Volokh Conspiracy
Mostly law professors | Sometimes contrarian | Often libertarian | Always independent
Quaking Quagmires
From the great torts scholar William Prosser, writing in 1953:
The realm of the conflict of laws is a dismal swamp, filled with quaking quagmires, and inhabited by learned but eccentric professors who theorize about mysterious matters in a strange and incomprehensible jargon.
I think things have improved, at least in this narrow area, since then, but I still like the quote. My searching to confirm the source, by the way, led me to this other quote, from the Kentucky Bar Journal in 1942 (writing about the word "quisling"):
Q … (with one august exception) has long seemed to the British mind to be a crooked, uncertain and slightly disreputable letter, suggestive of the questionable, the querulous, the quavering of quaking quagmires and quivering quicksands, of quibbles and quarrels, of queasiness, quackery, qualms, and Quilp …
Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Quite.
Shhhh --- I mean, quiet!
Quest for queer quotes.
The problem is fundamental, not marginal, as with conflict of laws. Torts comes from Scholasticism view of accidents. That is a Catholic church philosophy. The best guide to morality is the New Testament, the biography of one man. The reasonable person is a masking label for Jesus. That is illegal in our secular nation.
Torts requires the prediction of the future. Even the Church attributed that supernatural power to God. God could know the future, and prevent accidents. Only the lawyer believes man has this supernatural ability.
Torts is unauthorized industrial policy by depraved lawyers and juries. It destroyed manufacturing in this country. This out of control profession must be stopped to save our economy.
Torts adds no safety benefit whatsoever except lawyer unjust enrichment. All safety advances have come from technology, not a single life has been saved by torts.
Torts has one benefit. It replaces endless cycles of revenge for injuries. Yet the lawyer has given himself and his entity, government, immunity. By formal logic, immunity justifies violence as a remedy.
Um, there's plenty of tort law in the Bible.
The Common Law olagiarized the catechism of the 13th Century. That is illegal in our secular nation.
Assuming for argument that society and the legal system find the theory of torts a useful way to approach certain legal problems, why should religious origins (taking the assertion at face value) poison our ability to apply the theory in a secular context. I doubt many who study tort law find it a religious experience. I certainly did not. 🙂
Hi, Petti. Tort law requires future forecasting. This is a supernatural power attributed to God. Even the 13th Century Church did not believe man could predict the future. Only the lawyer of today does. This is a fake rule for the purpose of rent seeking and of unjust lawyer enrichment. Cannot be allowed.
There are likely a million spills in supermarket aisles for each injurious fall. People walk around them. The inattentive, decrepit old lady who breaks a hip, is making us all pay for her irresponsibility and for her pre-existing decrepitude. She is ripping us off, but mostly her lawyer is a thieving, un-American, crook. Your profession needs to be crushed and started over again to save our nation.
If you are not Catholic, I am stunned that you did not spot the unlawful origin of the Common Law. I condemn Jewish and Muslim law students for not resisting this lawless of Catholic Church doctrine on our nation. To the credit of the church, they moved on from Scholasticism in the 19th Century. The American lawyer has not. Why? He is making $trillion from the Inquisition 2.0 and must be stopped.
Quisling was only coined in 1940!
Yes, that's right -- the article was remarking on the then-new word.