Tort and Accident Law
Introductory
Hand Formula
A negligence test associated with Judge Learned Hand that compares the burden of precaution with the probability and magnitude of expected harm.
Why It Matters
The formula gives accident law a compact way to analyze whether precautions are cost-justified and how courts translate risk into standards of care.
Selected Literature
A short list of directly relevant archive entries.
1961
Intermediate
2004
Advanced
2016
Advanced
2019
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.