Civil Recourse Revisited

DSpace/Manakin Repository

Civil Recourse Revisited

Citable link to this page

 

 
Title: Civil Recourse Revisited
Author: Goldberg, John C.P.; Zipursky, Benjamin C.

Note: Order does not necessarily reflect citation order of authors.

Citation: John C.P. Goldberg & Benjamin C. Zipursky, Civil Recourse Revisited, 39 Fla. St. U. L. Rev. 342 (2011).
Access Status: Full text of the requested work is not available in DASH at this time (“dark deposit”). For more information on dark deposits, see our FAQ.
Full Text & Related Files:
Abstract: This essay responds to the extensive and thoughtful commentary on civil recourse theory provided by Curtis Bridgeman, Julian and Stephen Darwall, John Gardner, Andrew Gold, Scott Hershovitz, Gabe Mendlow, Nathan Oman, Arthur Ripstein, Anthony Sebok, Emily Sherwin, Jason Solomon, and Ernest Weinrib, all of whom participated in a 2011 symposium at Florida State University School of Law that was devoted to the subject. In it, we defend civil recourse theory against corrective justice theory and (following our own, independent contributions to the symposium) further develop our critiques of that theory. Against methodological criticisms, we maintain that civil recourse theory is an interpretive theory that has both explanatory and normative power. Finally, we briefly tease out some of the implications of civil recourse theory for private law beyond torts (contract law, in particular), and for the philosophical analysis of concepts such as accountability and responsibility.
Published Version: http://www.law.fsu.edu/journals/lawreview/backissues/vol39/documents/goldbergAndzipursky.pdf
Other Sources: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2076340
Citable link to this page: http://nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:11339421
Downloads of this work:

Show full Dublin Core record

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

 
 

Search DASH


Advanced Search
 
 

Submitters