Tort and Accident Law
Intermediate
Bilateral Precaution
A situation in which both injurer and victim can take precautions that affect the probability or magnitude of harm.
Why It Matters
Bilateral precaution matters because liability rules must preserve incentives for both sides, not only for the party most visibly associated with the accident.
Selected Literature
A short list of directly relevant archive entries.
1961
Intermediate
1970
Advanced
2004
Advanced
2016
Advanced
Related Cases
1947
Foundations of Law and Economics
United States v. Carroll Towing Co.
159 F.2d 169 (2d Cir. 1947)
Negligence, precaution costs, accident probability, and expected loss.
1928
Foundations of Law and Economics
Palsgraf v. Long Island Railroad Co.
248 N.Y. 339, 162 N.E. 99 (1928)
Duty, foreseeability, and the legal boundary placed on liability for an extended chain of accidental harm.
1944
Foundations of Law and Economics
Escola v. Coca Cola Bottling Co.
24 Cal. 2d 453, 150 P.2d 436 (1944)
Proof of negligence and the allocation of product-accident risk between manufacturers and consumers.
1976
Securities Regulation
Ernst & Ernst v. Hochfelder
425 U.S. 185 (1976)
Scienter requirement for private damages actions under Section 10(b) and Rule 10b-5.