Abstract
Caution should be exercised in deducing what this series of decisions may portend for the future. There is no question that the decisions represent a pro-plaintiff swing in the historical pendulum of tort law in this jurisdiction. In many instances, however, the holdings of the cases do not offer as much promise of that swing as the dicta. Moreover, many of the decisions and their impact are made obscure by the concurring, special concurring and dissenting opinions. Recent changes in the supreme court justices, with Justices Crockett and Wilkins leaving and Justices Oakes and Howe arriving, may well have an impact on these trends. Although some of the decisions might be viewed as controversial, in general the trend certainly cannot be viewed as either revolutionary or placing Utah in the vanguard of tort reform. What is deducible from the decisions is an apparent frustration with the status quo and with legislative inaction in some areas. Blind adherence to the doctrine of stare decisis has been abandoned in exchange for a more flexible and updated evaluation of some of the overall policies affecting tort law. Only time will tel if the last two or three years are the beginning of a permanent swing in tort policy or merely a transient shift in the corpus juris of the state. Certainly, however, the cases suggest that it is time for the plaintiffs' bar to challenge old concepts and be innovative in approach. Likewise, the defense bar should be chary of blind reliance upon supposedly settled doctrines.
Recommended Citation
Roberts, Gordon L. and Thronson, Charles H.
(1981)
"A New Perspective-Has Utah Entered
the Twentieth Century in
Tort Law?,"
Utah Law Review: Vol. 1981:
No.
3, Article 2.
Available at:
https://dc.law.utah.edu/ulr/vol1981/iss3/2