1932

Abstract

This review examines the state of scholarship on the politics of injury law, a relatively neglected field. I argue that injury law is an important site of political contestation, particularly for social and economic minorities, that should receive much more attention from law and social science scholars. Drawing on past research from other areas of legal inquiry, especially rights litigation, I suggest that the political significance of injury law tracks along two key dimensions—the institutional and the symbolic—and that both dimensions deserve greater study. I also argue for collaborative research with legal practitioners, who have significant experiential knowledge to offer about how power operates in this space. The need for this research has perhaps never been greater, as corporate and other interests increasingly move to neutralize this historically important site of political contestation.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-lawsocsci-101518-043000
2020-10-13
2024-06-21
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/lawsocsci/16/1/annurev-lawsocsci-101518-043000.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-lawsocsci-101518-043000&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

Literature Cited

  1. Abel R. 1987. The real tort crisis—too few claims. Ohio State Law J 48:2443–67
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Auerbach J. 1976. Unequal Justice: Lawyers and Social Change in Modern America New York: Oxford Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Bagenstos S, Schlanger M. 2007. Hedonic damages, hedonic adaptation, and disability. Vanderbilt Law Rev 60:745–72
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Baker T. 2005. The Medical Malpractice Myth Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Barbas S. 2018. Privacy and the right to one's image: a cultural and legal history. See Bloom et al. 2018 202–28
  6. Barnes J. 2007. Rethinking the landscape of tort reform: lessons from the asbestos case. Justice Syst. J. 28:2157–81
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Baxi P. 2018. Inflicting legal injuries: the place of the “two finger test” in Indian rape law. See Bloom et al. 2018 267–92
  8. Berrey E, Nelson R, Nielsen L 2017. Rights on Trial: How Workplace Discrimination Law Perpetuates Inequality Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Bloom A. 2006a. From justice to global peace: a (brief) genealogy of the class action crisis. Loyola L.A. Law Rev. 36:719–58
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Bloom A. 2006b. “Milking the cash cow” and other stories: transnational workers’ rights litigation in the media. Vt. Law Rev. 30:2179–220
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Bloom A. 2010. To be real: sexual identity in tort litigation. N.C. Law Rev. 88:357–426
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Bloom A, Engel D, McCann M 2018. Injury and Injustice: The Cultural Politics of Harm and Redress Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Bloom A, Galanter M. 2018. Good injuries. See Bloom et al. 2018 185–201
  14. Bloom A, Miller PS. 2011. Blindsight: how we see disabilities in tort litigation. Wash. Law Rev. 86:709–53
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Brown W. 1995. States of Injury: Power and Freedom in Late Modernity Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Burbank S, Farhang S. 2017. Rights and Retrenchment: The Counterrevolution Against Federal Litigation Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Chamallas M, Wriggins J. 2010. The Measure of Injury: Race, Gender, and Tort Law New York: N.Y. Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Chemerinsky E. 2017. Closing the Courthouse Door: How Your Constitutional Rights Became Unenforceable New Haven, CT: Yale Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Dahl R. 1957. Decision-making in a democracy: the Supreme Court as a national policy-maker. J. Public Law 6:279–95
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Daniels S, Martin J. 2002. It was the best of times, it was the worst of times: the precarious nature of plaintiffs’ practice in Texas. Tex. Law Rev. 80:71781–828
    [Google Scholar]
  21. DeVito S, Jurs A. 2014. “Doubling-down” for defendants: the pernicious effects of tort reform. Penn State Law Rev 118:543–99
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Dolbeare K, Hammond P. 1971. The School Prayer Decisions: From Court Policy to Local Practice Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Engel D. 1984. The Oven Bird's Song: insiders, outsiders, and personal injuries in an American community. Law Soc. Rev. 18:4551–82
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Engel D. 2001. Injury and identity: the damaged self in three cultures. Between Law and Culture: Relocating Legal Studies DT Goldberg, MT Musheno, LC Bower 3–21 Minneapolis: Univ. Minn. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Engel D. 2016. The Myth of the Litigious Society: Why We Don't Sue Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Engel D, Engel J. 2010. Tort, Custom, and Karma: Globalization and Legal Consciousness in Thailand Stanford, CA: Stanford Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Engstrom N. 2011. Sunlight and settlement mills. N.Y. Univ. Law Rev. 86:805–86
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Fitzpatrick B. 2019. The Conservative Case for Class Actions Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Franks M. 2018. Injury inequality. See Bloom et al. 2018 231–47
  30. Galanter M. 1974. Why the “haves” come out ahead: speculations on the limits of legal change. Law Soc. Rev. 9:195–160
    [Google Scholar]
  31. Galanter M. 1983. Reading the landscape of disputes: what we know and don't know (and think we know) about our allegedly contentious and litigation society. UCLA Law Rev 31:14–72
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Galanter M. 1996. Real world torts: an antidote to anecdotes. Md. Law Rev. 55:1093–160
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Galanter M. 2004. The vanishing trial: an examination of trials and related matters in federal and state courts. J. Empir. Leg. Stud. 1:3459–570
    [Google Scholar]
  34. Galanter M, Garth B, Hensler D, Zemans K 1994. How to improve civil justice policy. Judicature 77:4 185 229–230
    [Google Scholar]
  35. Geertz C. 1983. Local Knowledge: Further Essays in Interpretive Anthropology New York: Basic Books
    [Google Scholar]
  36. Gideon v. Wainright 372 U.S. 335 1963.
  37. Haltom W, McCann M. 2004. Distorting the Law: Tort Reform, Mass Media, and the Social Production of Legal Knowledge Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press
    [Google Scholar]
  38. Handler J. 1978. Social Movements and the Legal System: A Theory of Law Reform and Social Change New York: Academic
    [Google Scholar]
  39. Hans V. 2000. Business on Trial: The Civil Jury and Corporate Responsibility New Haven, CT: Yale Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  40. Helland E, Klick J, Tabarrok A 2005. Data watch: tort-uring the data. J. Econ. Perspect. 19:2207–20
    [Google Scholar]
  41. Helland E, Yoon J. 2017. Estimating effects of English rule on litigation outcomes. Rev. Econ. Stat. 99:4678–82
    [Google Scholar]
  42. Hensler D. 2013. The socio-economics of mass torts: what we know, don't know and should know. Research Handbook on the Economics of Torts J Arlen 279–304 Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar
    [Google Scholar]
  43. Hensler D, Peterson M. 1993. Understanding mass personal injury litigation: a socio-legal analysis. Brooklyn Law Rev 59:961–1063
    [Google Scholar]
  44. Jain SL. 2006. Injury: The Politics of Product Design and Safety Law in the United States Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  45. Koga Y. 2018. Law's imperial amnesia: transnational legal redress in East Asia. See Bloom et al. 2018 317–50
  46. Lahav A. 2017. In Praise of Litigation New York: Oxford Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  47. Lahav A, Siegelman P. 2019. The curious incident of the falling win rate. Univ. Calif. Davis Law Rev. 53:1371–427
    [Google Scholar]
  48. Lasswell H. 1936. Politics: Who Gets What, When, How New York: Whittlesey House
    [Google Scholar]
  49. McCann M. 1994. Rights at Work: Pay Equity Reform and the Politics of Legal Mobilization Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press
    [Google Scholar]
  50. McCann M, Engel D, Bloom A 2018. Introduction. See Bloom et al. 2018 1–24
  51. McCann M, Haltom W, Bloom A 2001. Java jive: genealogy of a juridical icon. Univ. Miami Law Rev. 56:1113–78
    [Google Scholar]
  52. McCann M, Haltom W, Fisher S 2013. Criminalizing big tobacco: legal mobilization and the politics of responsibility for health risks in the United States. Law Soc. Inq. 38:2288–321
    [Google Scholar]
  53. Merry S. 1990. Getting Justice and Getting Even: Legal Consciousness among Working Class Americans Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press
    [Google Scholar]
  54. Milner N. 1986. The dilemmas of legal mobilization: ideologies and strategies of mental patient liberation groups. Law Policy 8:105–31
    [Google Scholar]
  55. Minow M. 1990. Making All the Difference: Inclusion, Exclusion, and American Law Ithaca, NY: Cornell Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  56. Mor S. 2018. The meaning of injury: a disability perspective. See Bloom et al. 2018 27–49
  57. Nader L. 2002. The Life of the Law: Anthropological Project Berkeley: Univ. Calif. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  58. Nelson R, Trubek D. 1992. Introduction: new problems and new paradigms in studies of the legal profession. Lawyers’ Ideals/Lawyer's Practices: Transformations in the American Legal Profession RL Nelson, DM Trubek, RL Solomon 1–27 Ithaca, NY: Cornell Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  59. Olson S. 1984. Clients and Lawyers: Securing the Rights of Disabled Persons Westport, CT: Greenwood
    [Google Scholar]
  60. Rosenberg G. 1991. The Hollow Hope: Can Courts Bring About Social Change? Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press
    [Google Scholar]
  61. Saks M. 1992. Do we really know anything about the behavior of the tort litigation system—and why not. Univ. Pa. Law Rev. 140:1147–291
    [Google Scholar]
  62. Scheingold S. 1974. The Politics of Rights: Lawyers, Public Policy, and Political Change New Haven, CT: Yale Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  63. Scheingold S, Bloom A. 1998. Transgressive cause lawyering: practice sites and the politicization of the professional. Int. J. Leg. Prof. 5:209–53
    [Google Scholar]
  64. Schuck P. 1986. Agent Orange on Trial: Mass Toxic Disasters in the Courts Cambridge, UK: Belknap
    [Google Scholar]
  65. Staszak S. 2015. No Day in Court: Access to Justice and the Politics of Judicial Retrenchment New York: Oxford Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  66. Tushnet M. 1984. An essay on rights. Tex. Law Rev. 62:1363–403
    [Google Scholar]
  67. Wada Y. 2018. Incommensurability and power in constructing meaning of injury at the medical malpractice disputes. See Bloom et al. 2018 135–53
  68. Wenger K. 2018. The unconscionable impossibility of reparations for slavery; or, why the master's rules will never dismantle the master's house. See Bloom et al. 2018 248–66
  69. Williams P. 1987. Alchemical notes: reconstructing ideals from deconstructed rights. Harvard Civ. Rights-Civ. Lib. Law Rev. 22:410–33
    [Google Scholar]
  70. Zemans F. 1983. Legal mobilization: the neglected role of the law in the political system. Am. Political Sci. Rev. 77:690–702
    [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-lawsocsci-101518-043000
Loading
  • Article Type: Review Article
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error