Meiring de Villiers

article

This article presents a legal and policy analysis of issue preclusion in product liability litigation. The analysis shows that application of offensive collateral estoppel to preclude liability constitutes an abridgement of a fundamental right, and should therefore be subject to strict scrutiny. The major public policy interests of collateral estoppel to be weighed in a strict scrutiny calculus are decisional consistenct and judicial economy. In fact, offensive collateral estoppel has an ambiguouscausal connection with decisional consistency and may actually undermine it. Furthermore, analysis of constitutional jurisprudence shows that the fundamental right at issue may not be rationed or compromised to promote a purelyeconomic interest. Based on these considerations, the offensive use of collateral estoppel to preclude liability does not pass the strict scrutiny test of constitutionality. Policy implications of this analysis include limitations on full faith and credit recognition and enforcement of product liability judgements across state lines.

Stanford University

Cornell Journal of Law and Public Policy

de Villiers

U.S. Dept. of Defense and the Center for Research in Information Security

523-555

Cornell University

9

Dept. of Management Science and Engineering

2001-01-01

2000

technology, risk, legal, policy, collateral

English

Legal and policy critique of tecnological risk