The purpose of this article is to develop a pragmatic analysis of corrective justice that will serve as a partial justification for current practices of tort adjudication. Part I discusses the concept of corrective justice and explores its relationship to the problem of justifying tort law. Part II argues that certain contemporary theories of corrective justice fail to provide an adequate basis for regarding individual tort outcomes as just. Part III develops a pragmatic account of corrective justice and argues that it accurately describes current practices of tort adjudication. Finally, Part IV argues that these practices are justified in the sense that they are reasonably calculated to resolve the problems that are inherent in judging corrective justice cases.
Catharine P. Wells,
Tort Law as Corrective Justice: A Pragmatic Justification for Jury Adjudication,
Mich. L. Rev.
Available at: https://repository.law.umich.edu/mlr/vol88/iss8/3