论文部分内容阅读
在此文中,我希望能告诉你们,一个法官是如何看待《侵权法重述》(以下简称《重述》)的。当然,我大多谈论的是第三次《重述》,因为这是最新的。但是由于第三次《重述》正在制定过程中,所以会涉及第三次《重述》与第二次《重述》[1]之间存在的一些交叉的部分。[2]毕竟第三次《重述》的制定工作已经持续了将近20年。[3]问题在于:法官们如何看待《重述》,它是有用的,或者大多是不相干的,还是最好的,抑或对于我们来说其帮助是微乎
In this passage I would like to tell you how a judge views the “restatement of tort law” (hereinafter referred to as “restatement”). Of course, most of what I am talking about is the third “recap” because it is up-to-date. However, since the third “restatement” is under development, there will be some cross-cutting issues between the third “restatement” and the second “restatement” [1]. After all, the third “restatement” has been going on for almost 20 years. [3] The question is: How do judges think of “restatement”? Is it useful, mostly irrelevant, or best, or is it for us