Two main ways of accounting for tort liability is the economic efficiency view and the corrective justice view.

Explain the reasoning behind each of these views.
Economic Efficient View states: * Accidents causing harm set back the common good. * The economic account reasons that by internalizing the costs of accidents to those who cause them, parties will be motivated to prevent accidents that set back the common good. * Is similar to the idea of deterrence in criminal law. * Forward looking: emphasizes the way common good is better furthered by the tort system (the economic account).

Corrective Justice Theories of Tort view states: * The justice account holds that the point of tort law is to rectify an injustice that exists because of a party’s tortuous act. * Instead of looking at tort from overall societal good (measured in wealth), the justice account focuses on the nature of the interaction between the victim and the tortfeasor (the wrongdoer who committed the tort) * Backward-looking: suggesting that the common good includes appropriate responses to injustice (the justice account)

Which of the two views do you think is more persuasive? Why?
It depends on the type of tort case. While the Economic account measures in terms of “internalizing the costs of accidents to those who cause them, parties will be motivated to prevent accidents that set back the common good.” When analyzing this approach it makes clear that this best suites class action suits or wrongs against society as a whole. For example, in the case of Brinkley v. PG&E, PG&E was dumping a toxins in the local water of Hinkley, Ca, which was making the residents sick. Erin Brokovich and the lawyers on the case uncovered the scandal and PG&E settled for around $333 million dollars. This would be a classic example of where to use the “Economic