Re: Ronald Dworkin 的詭辯 - 法學

※ 引述《hyperion (青春癡呆小右派)》之銘言：
: ※ 引述《istj (Kat's BF)》之銘言：
: : 您是在講 torts 的 joint and several liability 嗎?
: : 如果是的話那這跟美國的定義不一樣
: : Def: All defendants are joined together (joint liability)
: : and each defendant is liable for the entire recovery (several liability)
: : 這並沒有說受害者可以拿到數倍的賠償,
: : 只有說他可以向任何一個defendant要求全部的損失
: : 這是為了避免defendant 諉過給其他的defendant, 進而逃避liability
: ...
: When Several parties cause harm to someone, a question arises
: concerning who the victim can sue and how damages should be
: allocated among them. To illustrate, suppose that you suffer
: a loss of $100 in an accident caused by two people called A
: and B. They are *jointly* liable if you can sue *both* of
: them at once, naming A and B as co-defendants and receiving
: a judgment of $100 against them. They are *severally* liable
: if you can sue *either* A or B separately, naming them each
: of them as a defendant in a distinct trial. If A and B are
: severally liable and you can recover $100 from each of them,
: your total recovery will equal 200% of the actual harm(
: double compensation).
: (Cooter and Ulen, Law and Economics, 3rd edition, p.339-340)
: 當然 Cooter 與 Ulen 不是學法律的，不過我應該沒有讀錯吧？

Several liability -
liability that is separate and distinct from another's liablity,
so that the plaintiff may bring a separate action against one defendant
without joining the other liable parties.
(Black Law Dictionary, 3rd edition, p.417)

Joint and several liability -
Liability that may be apportioned either among two or more parties
or to only one or a few select members of the group
(Black Law Dictionary, 3rd edition, p.416)

Several liability is different from joint and several liablity.
Notice that in J&S liability the liability is "apportioned" among
joint tortfeasors. there is no double compensation under J&S.
We did not learn several liablity as a stand alone doctrine,
therefore I can not comment on whether one can get double compensation.

Hope that clear up things.

--