In this Article, Professor O\u27Connell discusses the inadequacies behind auto insurance and the system of no-fault auto insurance. Picking up where a California Senator left off with the provocative question, Why not offer consumers a choice in the marketplace?, the author sets forth a proposal whereby consumers would have a choice. Consumers would be allowed to choose between fault-based and no-fault insurance. Such a choice would insulate the costs of no-fault coverage from those of tort liability. The latter part of the Article is spent rebutting the proposals and ideas put forth by the other contributing authors
The concept of no-fault automobile insurance has provoked an extraordinary amount of heated discussi...
While mandatory auto insurance laws virtually guarantee the availability of remedies for auto injuri...
In this Article, the authors describe the Automobile Insurance Act of Quebec, its provisions for dam...
In this Article, Professor Brown tackles the concept of no-fault auto insurance from the perspective...
In his Forward to this volume\u27s Tort Law - No-Fault Insurance Symposium, Mr. Sugarman briefly not...
In this Article, Mr. Joost reviews the auto insurance choice system and highlights recent legislativ...
In this Article, Mr. George, offers some suggestions for the solution of the automobile insurance pr...
In this Article, Professor Carr responds to the proposal by O\u27Connell and Joost whereby motorists...
At the annual meeting of the Association of American Law Schools, December 27, 1974, the Torts Secti...
One of the primary purposes of the automobile liability insurance system is to provide compensation ...
At the annual meeting of the Association of American Law Schools, December 27, 1974, the Torts Secti...
Tort and insurance law treat driving as a centrally important activity and treat injuries caused by ...
This thesis presents an overview of no-fault automobile insurance and examines current issues in the...
In this Article, Professor Little takes issue with the Jeffrey O\u27Connell and Robert Joost freedo...
In discussing no-fault insurance in any Law Review article, undoubtedly one with legal training unde...
The concept of no-fault automobile insurance has provoked an extraordinary amount of heated discussi...
While mandatory auto insurance laws virtually guarantee the availability of remedies for auto injuri...
In this Article, the authors describe the Automobile Insurance Act of Quebec, its provisions for dam...
In this Article, Professor Brown tackles the concept of no-fault auto insurance from the perspective...
In his Forward to this volume\u27s Tort Law - No-Fault Insurance Symposium, Mr. Sugarman briefly not...
In this Article, Mr. Joost reviews the auto insurance choice system and highlights recent legislativ...
In this Article, Mr. George, offers some suggestions for the solution of the automobile insurance pr...
In this Article, Professor Carr responds to the proposal by O\u27Connell and Joost whereby motorists...
At the annual meeting of the Association of American Law Schools, December 27, 1974, the Torts Secti...
One of the primary purposes of the automobile liability insurance system is to provide compensation ...
At the annual meeting of the Association of American Law Schools, December 27, 1974, the Torts Secti...
Tort and insurance law treat driving as a centrally important activity and treat injuries caused by ...
This thesis presents an overview of no-fault automobile insurance and examines current issues in the...
In this Article, Professor Little takes issue with the Jeffrey O\u27Connell and Robert Joost freedo...
In discussing no-fault insurance in any Law Review article, undoubtedly one with legal training unde...
The concept of no-fault automobile insurance has provoked an extraordinary amount of heated discussi...
While mandatory auto insurance laws virtually guarantee the availability of remedies for auto injuri...
In this Article, the authors describe the Automobile Insurance Act of Quebec, its provisions for dam...