Should Victims of Exposure to a Toxic Substance have an Independent Claim for Medical Monitoring?

Thomas J. Miceli and Kathleen Segerson

A chapter in Research in Law and Economics, 2007, pp 217-231 from Emerald Group Publishing Limited

Abstract: Traditional tort law does not allow a victim of exposure to a toxic substance to seek damages without evidence of actual loss. Given the difficulty of collecting damages after a long latency period, however, we examine the desirability of granting exposure victims an independent cause of action for medical monitoring at the time of exposure. We show that such a cause of action is not necessary to induce victims to invest in efficient monitoring. It can, however, increase incentives for injurer care, but only at the cost of greater litigation costs. The general reluctance of courts to adopt a cause of action reflects their recognition of this trade-off.

Date: 2007
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.101 ... d&utm_campaign=repec (text/html)
https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.101 ... d&utm_campaign=repec (application/pdf)
Access to full text is restricted to subscribers

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:eme:rlwezz:s0193-5895(06)22007-4

DOI: 10.1016/S0193-5895(06)22007-4

Access Statistics for this chapter

More chapters in Research in Law and Economics from Emerald Group Publishing Limited
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Emerald Support ().