*Please answer all the questions and give an explanation of why?

1. Are there social factors, public policy considerations, or other undesirable outcomes that justify the "slippery slope" argument in favor of caps on damages in tort cases involving medical negligence suits? What are they? 2. Considerable overlap exists in the law between civil tort cases and criminal cases. How does the purpose of an award of damages to a plaintiff in a tort case serve a different social purpose from the purpose of a conviction in a criminal case? 3. Should the presence or absence of liability insurance influence the remedy available to an injured tort victim? Why or why not? 4. Does an award of punitive damages accomplish the intended goal of deterring wrongful conduct on the part of individual bad tortfeasors and the world at large? Why or why not? 5. What justifications, if any, exist for manufacturers of products to be subjected to strict tort liability? 6. Tort reform is necessary due to the fact that juries are often misled by persuasive personal injury lawyers into returning verdicts that are unreasonable and can be outrageously high. Is this statement true or false, and why? 7. Which of the definitions of proximate cause that we have discussed in class strikes the proper balance between the right of a tort victim to recover damages, and the right of a defendant to be free from liability for remote or unforeseeable injuries?

8. Certain "statutory torts" permit the prevailing party to recover their attorney's fees. What are the purposes of such a provision, and what goals are served by such a provision? 9. What are the four requirements a class action claim must establish in order that the class action be certified?

10. What is the purpose for requiring a plaintiff to prove up the "case within a case" in the legal malpractice negligence context?

11. Describe the nature of the duty owed by a professional to a client in a professional negligence case.

12. Do Federal and state "statutory torts" provide a meaningful remedy in cases where gaps in tort law exist and common law remedies are incomplete or not available? Why or why not?

13. Which factors do you believe are the most important ones to consider in evaluating a personal injury case, and why?