Restatement of the Law, Second: Conflict of Laws.

Although the Greenman rule was transmitted to most other states via Section 402A of the Restatement of Torts, Second ( published in 1964 after Greenman ), the Supreme Court of California refused to adopt Section 402A's " unreasonably dangerous " limitation upon strict liability in 1972.

The Restatement ( Second ) of Torts, § 328D describes a two step process for establishing res ipsa loquitur.

( Restatement ( Second ) Of Conflict of Laws § 283 ( 2 ) ( 1971 ).

* Restatement of Torts, Second

Conveniently, the American Law Institute's Restatement ( Second ) of Torts distills false imprisonment liability analysis into a four-prong test:

In 1952, the Institute started Restatement Second — updates of the original Restatements with new analyses and concepts with and expanded authorities.

* Contracts ( Uniform Commercial Code and Restatement ( Second ) of Contracts )

* Torts ( General common law and Restatement ( Second ) of Torts )

The language eventually adopted for the Second Restatement reads: " The remedy granted for breach may be limited as justice requires.

The Restatement ( Second ) of Contracts lists the following criteria can be used to determine whether a specific failure constitutes a breach:

American Law Institute, Restatement ( Second ) of Contracts § 241 ( 1981 )

( Restatement of the Law, Second, Torts )

* Restatement of Torts, Second

Additional information on the parol evidence rule may be found in Restatement ( Second ) of Contracts § 213.

* Section 211 of the American Law Institute's Restatement ( Second ) of Contracts, which has persuasive though non-binding force in courts, provides:

( See Restatement ( Second ) of Torts, 1965.

The Restatement ( Second ) of Torts § 218 states further that:

( Restatement ( Second ) of Torts § 256 ).

: In clarifying the meaning of intentionality in the context of a trespass to chattels claim, § 217 of the Restatement ( Second ) of Torts states that " intention is present when an act is done for the purpose of using or otherwise intermeddling with a chattel or with knowledge that such an intermeddling will, to a substantial certainty, result from the act ," and that, furthermore, " t is not necessary that the actor should know or have reason to know that such intermeddling is a violation of the possessory rights of another.

* Restatement ( Second ) of Torts, §§ 217, 218, 221, 252, 256.

" Restatement ( Second ) of Contracts § 25 ( 1981 ).

During Wechsler's tenure as director, the American Law Institute completed the second restatement of the Conflict of Laws, Contracts, Judgments, and Torts, as well as the original restatement of Foreign Relations Law of the United States and large parts of the Second Restatement of Property.

In 1952, the Institute started the Restatement Second — updates of the original Restatements with new analyses and concepts with and expanded authorities.

* Restatement ( Third ) of Torts § 14 ( Tentative Draft No. 1, March 28, 2001 )

Section 2 of the Restatement ( Third ) of Torts: Products Liability distinguishes between three major types of product liability claims:

Therefore, in 2001, the American Law Institute proposed in a draft of the Restatement ( Third ), Torts: Liability for Physical Harm ( Basic Principles ) that proximate cause should be replaced with scope of liability.

The Restatement ( Third ) of Torts, § 17, adopts a similar test, although it eschews the ' exclusive control ' element.

In 1939, the American Law Institute issued the Restatement of Torts, containing a summary of trade secret law as it then existed.

" t common law, every unauthorized entry upon the soil of another was a trespasser ", however, under the tort scheme established by the Restatement of Torts, liability for unintentional intrusions arises only under circumstances evincing negligence or where the intrusion involved a highly dangerous activity.

In the United States, the American Law Institute's Restatement of Torts provides a general rule to determine liability for battery:

The Restatement Third now includes volumes on Agency, the Law Governing Lawyers, Property ( Mortgages, Servitudes, Wills and Other Donative Transfers ), Restitution and Unjust Enrichment, Suretyship and Guaranty, Torts ( Products Liability, Apportionment of Liability, and Physical and Emotional Harm ), and Unfair Competition.

New Restatement projects on Economic Torts, Employment Law, Trusts, and the U. S. Law of International Commercial Arbitration are currently underway as part of the Restatement Third series.

Shortly thereafter, Cardozo became a member of the group that founded the American Law Institute, which crafted a Restatement of the Law of Torts, Contracts, and a host of other private law subjects.

* Restatement of Torts, Apportionment of Liability, Third

* Restatement of Torts, General Principles, Third ( discussion draft )

* Restatement of Torts, Products Liability, Third

See Restatement § 220 ( 2 ) ( setting forth a non-exhaustive list of factors relevant to determining whether a hired party is an employee ).

The American Law Institute in 1932 included the principle of estoppel into § 90 of the Restatement of Contracts, stating:

" Harm to personal property or diminution of its quality, condition or value as a result of a defendant's use can also result in liability under § 218 ( b ) of the Restatement.

As the American Law Institute's Restatement of the Law, Third, Agency § 7. 01 states,

Nevertheless, the Court looked to the Restatement ( Third ) Foreign Relations Law, § 415, Comment j for the principle that:

Furthermore, the Court cited Restatement ( Third ) Foreign Relations Law, § 403, Comment e for the proposition that no conflict exists " where a person subject to regulation by two states can comply with both.

( See Restatement of Torts § 339 )

The Restatement also has a separate provision on unconscionability at § 208, " Unconscionable Contract or Term ," which broadly allows a court to limit the application of an unconscionable term or contract in order to avoid an unconscionable result.

The Restatement of Contracts, Second § 265 defines frustration of purpose:

( Restatement ( 2d ) Contracts § 59 ).

( Restatement ( Second ) of Torts § 283A ; Cleveland Rolling-Mill Co. v. Corrigan, 46 Ohio St. 283, 20 N. E.

) Restatement ( Second ) of Torts, § 289 cmt.