<?xml version="1.0" encoding="iso-8859-1" ?>
<rss version="2.0">
<channel>
<title>Aaron D. Twerski</title>
<copyright>Copyright (c) 2009  All rights reserved.</copyright>
<link>http://works.bepress.com/aaron_twerski</link>
<description>Recent documents in Aaron D. Twerski</description>
<language>en-us</language>
<lastBuildDate>Sun, 31 May 2009 03:04:34 PDT</lastBuildDate>
<ttl>3600</ttl>





<item>
<title>Products Liabililty: Problems and Process</title>
<link>http://works.bepress.com/aaron_twerski/93</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://works.bepress.com/aaron_twerski/93</guid>
<pubDate>Wed, 25 Jun 2008 15:14:49 PDT</pubDate>
<description></description>

<author>Aaron D. Twerski</author>


</item>


<item>
<title>The Cleaver, the Violin and the Scalpel: An Essay on Duty and the Third Restatement of Torts</title>
<link>http://works.bepress.com/aaron_twerski/92</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://works.bepress.com/aaron_twerski/92</guid>
<pubDate>Tue, 01 Apr 2008 14:25:10 PDT</pubDate>
<description>The article takes issue with the approach taken by Third Restatement of Torts Proposed Final Draft that insists that no-duty or limited duty rules should be formulated only when a court can promulgate clear , categorical , bright-line rules that are applicable to a general class of cases. In this article I demonstrate that no-duty rules may often have to be formulated and tailored to the facts of a specific case.  I respond to the critics who are concerned that no-duty rules that are fact specific allow the court to invade the province of juries whose task it is to apply law to facts. I contend that the kind of policy factors that give rise to  no-duty determinations are very different than those a jury considers when deciding whether a defendant's conduct was negligent.</description>

<author>Aaron D. Twerski</author>


<category>Chronology</category>

</item>


<item>
<title>Torts: Cases and Materials</title>
<link>http://works.bepress.com/aaron_twerski/91</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://works.bepress.com/aaron_twerski/91</guid>
<pubDate>Wed, 12 Mar 2008 11:19:43 PDT</pubDate>
<description></description>

<author>Aaron Twerski</author>


<category>Chronology</category>

</item>


<item>
<title>Commentary, An Ode to Rejection</title>
<link>http://works.bepress.com/aaron_twerski/90</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://works.bepress.com/aaron_twerski/90</guid>
<pubDate>Wed, 17 Oct 2007 12:20:23 PDT</pubDate>
<description></description>

<author>Aaron D. Twerski</author>


<category>Chronology</category>

</item>


<item>
<title>The Independent Doctrine of Ratification v. the Restatement and Mr. Seavey</title>
<link>http://works.bepress.com/aaron_twerski/89</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://works.bepress.com/aaron_twerski/89</guid>
<pubDate>Wed, 17 Oct 2007 12:17:14 PDT</pubDate>
<description></description>

<author>Aaron D. Twerski</author>


<category>Chronology</category>

</item>


<item>
<title>Treating the Untreatable: A Critique of the Proposed Pennsylvania Right to Treatment Law</title>
<link>http://works.bepress.com/aaron_twerski/88</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://works.bepress.com/aaron_twerski/88</guid>
<pubDate>Wed, 17 Oct 2007 12:14:58 PDT</pubDate>
<description></description>

<author>Aaron D. Twerski</author>


<category>Chronology</category>

</item>


<item>
<title>Enlightened Territorialism and Professor Cavers: The Pennsylvania Method</title>
<link>http://works.bepress.com/aaron_twerski/87</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://works.bepress.com/aaron_twerski/87</guid>
<pubDate>Wed, 17 Oct 2007 12:13:21 PDT</pubDate>
<description></description>

<author>Aaron D. Twerski</author>


<category>Chronology</category>

</item>


<item>
<title>Court Scrutiny of Medical Commitment: Collusion on Delusion</title>
<link>http://works.bepress.com/aaron_twerski/86</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://works.bepress.com/aaron_twerski/86</guid>
<pubDate>Wed, 17 Oct 2007 12:11:09 PDT</pubDate>
<description></description>

<author>Aaron D. Twerski</author>


<category>Chronology</category>

</item>


<item>
<title>A Return to Jurisdictional Due Process: The Case for the Vanishing Defendant</title>
<link>http://works.bepress.com/aaron_twerski/85</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://works.bepress.com/aaron_twerski/85</guid>
<pubDate>Wed, 17 Oct 2007 12:09:28 PDT</pubDate>
<description></description>

<author>Aaron D. Twerski</author>


<category>Chronology</category>

</item>


<item>
<title>Treating the Untreatable: A Critique of the Proposed Right to Treatment Law</title>
<link>http://works.bepress.com/aaron_twerski/84</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://works.bepress.com/aaron_twerski/84</guid>
<pubDate>Wed, 17 Oct 2007 12:04:45 PDT</pubDate>
<description></description>

<author>Aaron D. Twerski</author>


<category>Chronology</category>

</item>



</channel>
</rss>
