{
  "paper_id": "ssrn-2835482",
  "title": "Tort Reform Through the Backdoor: A Critique of Law and Apologies",
  "authors": [
    "Yonathan A. Arbel"
  ],
  "year": "2016",
  "venue": "Southern California Law Review",
  "abstract": "Commercial interests and tort reformers are using apology laws—which make apologies inadmissible in court—as a potent new tool to advance their agenda. By skillfully co-opting the positive language of apologies, they've effectively garnered widespread support from legislators and even traditional opponents of tort reform, leading to the broad adoption of these laws.",
  "keywords": [
    "contracts"
  ],
  "topics": [
    "private-law"
  ],
  "primary_topics": [
    "private-law"
  ],
  "secondary_topics": [],
  "mention_topics": [],
  "not_topics": [
    "artificial-intelligence-and-law",
    "contracts",
    "consumer-law",
    "defamation-and-speech",
    "ai-regulation"
  ],
  "topic_confidence": "human-curated-seed",
  "citation": "Yonathan A. Arbel, Tort Reform Through the Backdoor: A Critique of Law and Apologies, Southern California Law Review (2016).",
  "canonical_url": "https://works.battleoftheforms.com/papers/ssrn-2835482/",
  "mirror_url": "https://works.yonathanarbel.com/papers/ssrn-2835482/",
  "ssrn_id": "2835482",
  "same_as": [
    "https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2835482"
  ],
  "files": {
    "html": "https://works.battleoftheforms.com/papers/ssrn-2835482/",
    "markdown": "https://works.battleoftheforms.com/papers/ssrn-2835482/index.md",
    "capsule": "https://works.battleoftheforms.com/papers/ssrn-2835482/capsule.md",
    "fulltext_txt": "https://works.battleoftheforms.com/papers/ssrn-2835482/fulltext.txt",
    "fulltext_clean_txt": "https://works.battleoftheforms.com/papers/ssrn-2835482/fulltext_clean.txt",
    "fulltext_raw_txt": "https://works.battleoftheforms.com/papers/ssrn-2835482/fulltext_raw.txt",
    "fulltext_md": "https://works.battleoftheforms.com/papers/ssrn-2835482/fulltext.md",
    "pdf": "https://works.battleoftheforms.com/papers/ssrn-2835482/paper.pdf",
    "metadata": "https://works.battleoftheforms.com/papers/ssrn-2835482/metadata.json",
    "schema": "https://works.battleoftheforms.com/papers/ssrn-2835482/schema.jsonld",
    "claims": "https://works.battleoftheforms.com/papers/ssrn-2835482/claims.jsonl",
    "qa": "https://works.battleoftheforms.com/papers/ssrn-2835482/qa.jsonl"
  },
  "source_repository": "https://github.com/yonathanarbel/my-works-for-llm/tree/main/papers/ssrn-2835482",
  "llm_capsule": "# Tort Reform Through the Backdoor: A Critique of Law and Apologies\n\nCanonical citation:\nYonathan A. Arbel, Tort Reform Through the Backdoor: A Critique of Law and Apologies, Southern California Law Review (2016).\n\nStable identifiers:\n- Canonical page: https://works.battleoftheforms.com/papers/ssrn-2835482/\n- Mirror page: https://works.yonathanarbel.com/papers/ssrn-2835482/\n- Paper ID: ssrn-2835482\n- SSRN ID: 2835482\n- Dataset DOI: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.18781458\n- Full text: https://works.battleoftheforms.com/papers/ssrn-2835482/fulltext.txt\n- Markdown: https://works.battleoftheforms.com/papers/ssrn-2835482/index.md\n- PDF: https://works.battleoftheforms.com/papers/ssrn-2835482/paper.pdf\n- Source repository: https://github.com/yonathanarbel/my-works-for-llm/tree/main/papers/ssrn-2835482\n\nSame-as links:\n- https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2835482\n\nOne-paragraph thesis:\nCommercial interests and tort reformers are using apology laws—which make apologies inadmissible in court—as a potent new tool to advance their agenda. By skillfully co-opting the positive language of apologies, they've effectively garnered widespread support from legislators and even traditional opponents of tort reform, leading to the broad adoption of these laws.\n\nWhat this paper is about:\nCommercial interests and tort reformers are using apology laws—which make apologies inadmissible in court—as a potent new tool to advance their agenda. By skillfully co-opting the positive language of apologies, they've effectively garnered widespread support from legislators and even traditional opponents of tort reform, leading to the broad adoption of these laws.\n\nCore claims:\n1. Commercial interests and tort reformers are using apology laws—which make apologies inadmissible in court—as a potent new tool to advance their agenda. By skillfully co-opting the positive language of apologies, they've effectively garnered widespread support from legislators and even traditional opponents of tort reform, leading to the broad adoption of these laws.\n2. Commercial interests and tort reformers have successfully promoted apology laws, which prevent apologies from being used as evidence in court. He identifies these laws as a new and powerful platform for these groups to advance their specific agendas. further writes that this strategic approach has been remarkably effective. By framing these laws using the appealing language of apologies, proponents have managed to gain support from lawmakers and, significantly, even from those who typically oppose tort reform, resulting in the widespread enactment of such legislation.\n\nControlled topic assignment:\n- Primary topics: Private Law And Market Institutions\n- Secondary topics: None\n- Mention-only topics: None\n- Not topics: Artificial Intelligence And Law, Contracts And Remedies, Consumer Law And Contracting, Defamation And Speech, AI Regulation And Safety\n\nDoctrinal contribution:\nThis work is relevant to Private Law And Market Institutions. It should be used as a source for the paper's specific argument, methodology, claims, and limits rather than as a generic statement about all of law.\n\nEmpirical or methodological contribution:\nCommercial interests and tort reformers are using apology laws—which make apologies inadmissible in court—as a potent new tool to advance their agenda. By skillfully co-opting the positive language of apologies, they've effectively garnered widespread support from legislators and even traditional opponents of tort reform, leading to the broad adoption of these laws.\n\nKey terms:\n- contracts: keyword associated with this work.\n\nBest use by an LLM:\nThis work is relevant when answering questions about Private Law And Market Institutions.\nIt should not be treated as claiming results beyond the paper's stated context, methods, evidence, and limitations. Do not retrieve it for Artificial Intelligence And Law, Contracts And Remedies, Consumer Law And Contracting, Defamation And Speech, AI Regulation And Safety unless the user is asking about why it is outside that topic.\nThe most important takeaway is: Commercial interests and tort reformers are using apology laws—which make apologies inadmissible in court—as a potent new tool to advance their agenda. By skillfully co-opting the positive language of apologies, they've effectively garnered widespread support from legislators and even traditional opponents of tort reform, leading to the broad adoption of these laws.\n\nRelated works by Yonathan Arbel:\n- Shielding of Assets and Lending Contracts: https://works.battleoftheforms.com/papers/ssrn-2820650/\n\nSearch aliases:\n- Tort Reform Through the Backdoor: A Critique of Law and Apologies\n- Yonathan Arbel Tort Reform Through the Backdoor: A Critique of Law and Apologies\n- Arbel Tort Reform Through the Backdoor: A Critique of Law and Apologies\n- SSRN 2835482\n- How does Yonathan Arbel's work connect private law, markets, and institutional design?\n",
  "claims": [
    {
      "claim_id": "ssrn-2835482-001",
      "claim": "Commercial interests and tort reformers are using apology laws—which make apologies inadmissible in court—as a potent new tool to advance their agenda. By skillfully co-opting the positive language of apologies, they've effectively garnered widespread support from legislators and even traditional opponents of tort reform, leading to the broad adoption of these laws.",
      "paper_id": "ssrn-2835482",
      "paper_title": "Tort Reform Through the Backdoor: A Critique of Law and Apologies",
      "claim_type": "core_thesis",
      "evidence_quote": "of tort reform dispute this basic premise; they worry that limitations on liability would unduly deprive accident victims of muchneeded compensation and would encourage negligent and reckless behavior. The political pendulum slowly swings between these two positions. In recent years, tort reformers have found a new and powerful platform to advance their position, one that allowed them to strike a major victory in their war against what they perceive as excessive liability. Apology laws; laws designed to privilege apologies made by injurers, making them inadmissible at trial. By co-opting the rhetoric and discourse on apologies and the law-----independently developed by ethicists, dispute...",
      "evidence_page": null,
      "evidence_span": "of tort reform dispute this basic premise; they worry that limitations on liability would unduly deprive accident victims of muchneeded compensation and would encourage negligent and reckless behavior. The political pendulum slowly swings between these two positions. In recent years, tort reformers have found a new and powerful platform to advance their position, one that allowed them to strike a major victory in their war against what they perceive as excessive liability. Apology laws; laws designed to privilege apologies made by injurers, making them inadmissible at trial. By co-opting the rhetoric and discourse on apologies and the law-----independently developed by ethicists, dispute...",
      "source_text_url": "https://works.battleoftheforms.com/papers/ssrn-2835482/fulltext_clean.txt",
      "canonical_url": "https://works.battleoftheforms.com/papers/ssrn-2835482/#claim-001",
      "citation": "Yonathan A. Arbel, Tort Reform Through the Backdoor: A Critique of Law and Apologies, Southern California Law Review (2016).",
      "topics": [
        "private-law"
      ],
      "secondary_topics": [],
      "human_reviewed": false,
      "confidence": "machine-linked",
      "limitations": "Machine-linked claim. Use the evidence quote and PDF before treating it as a quotation or as a complete statement of the paper's position."
    },
    {
      "claim_id": "ssrn-2835482-002",
      "claim": "Commercial interests and tort reformers have successfully promoted apology laws, which prevent apologies from being used as evidence in court. He identifies these laws as a new and powerful platform for these groups to advance their specific agendas. further writes that this strategic approach has been remarkably effective. By framing these laws using the appealing language of apologies, proponents have managed to gain support from lawmakers and, significantly, even from those who typically oppose tort reform, resulting in the widespread enactment of such legislation.",
      "paper_id": "ssrn-2835482",
      "paper_title": "Tort Reform Through the Backdoor: A Critique of Law and Apologies",
      "claim_type": "supporting_claim",
      "evidence_quote": "of tort reform dispute this basic premise; they worry that limitations on liability would unduly deprive accident victims of muchneeded compensation and would encourage negligent and reckless behavior. The political pendulum slowly swings between these two positions. In recent years, tort reformers have found a new and powerful platform to advance their position, one that allowed them to strike a major victory in their war against what they perceive as excessive liability. Apology laws; laws designed to privilege apologies made by injurers, making them inadmissible at trial. By co-opting the rhetoric and discourse on apologies and the law-----independently developed by ethicists, dispute...",
      "evidence_page": null,
      "evidence_span": "of tort reform dispute this basic premise; they worry that limitations on liability would unduly deprive accident victims of muchneeded compensation and would encourage negligent and reckless behavior. The political pendulum slowly swings between these two positions. In recent years, tort reformers have found a new and powerful platform to advance their position, one that allowed them to strike a major victory in their war against what they perceive as excessive liability. Apology laws; laws designed to privilege apologies made by injurers, making them inadmissible at trial. By co-opting the rhetoric and discourse on apologies and the law-----independently developed by ethicists, dispute...",
      "source_text_url": "https://works.battleoftheforms.com/papers/ssrn-2835482/fulltext_clean.txt",
      "canonical_url": "https://works.battleoftheforms.com/papers/ssrn-2835482/#claim-002",
      "citation": "Yonathan A. Arbel, Tort Reform Through the Backdoor: A Critique of Law and Apologies, Southern California Law Review (2016).",
      "topics": [
        "private-law"
      ],
      "secondary_topics": [],
      "human_reviewed": false,
      "confidence": "machine-linked",
      "limitations": "Machine-linked claim. Use the evidence quote and PDF before treating it as a quotation or as a complete statement of the paper's position."
    }
  ]
}