Law professor examines concept of ‘fault’ in contract law in new article
Law Professor Marco Jimenez’s article, “Retribution in Contract Law,” was published in the University of California-Davis Law Review, and Lawrence Solum featured the article on his Legal Theory Blog.
Article Summary
Traditional contract doctrine holds that there is no place for “fault” in Anglo-American contract law, in which a promisor is said to be held strictly liable for breaching a contract and is merely required to compensate the promisee for its disappointed expectations. However, in a recent article, “Retribution in Contract Law,” Professor Jimenez argues that if we focus on what judges do rather than on what they say they do when they decide contracts disputes, the wrongfulness of the promisor’s breach plays an important role in determining the remedy a court will ultimately award, indicating that courts are not only compensating injured promisees, but punishing breaching promisors as well.
About Professor Jimenez
Marco J. Jimenez is a Professor of Law at Stetson and teaches and writes in the areas of Contracts, Remedies, Western Legal Thought, International Sales Law and Arbitration, and Interdisciplinary Jurisprudence. Before joining Stetson’s faculty in 2006, Professor Jimenez clerked for the Honorable James Lawrence King on the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida, and practiced in the areas of contract, antitrust, and securities law.
Post date: Nov. 4, 2019
Media contact: Kate Bradshaw
[email protected] | 727-430-1580