dojW000441.xml

dojW000441.xml

born-digital

email

yes

no

2001-11-20

Tuesday, November 20, 2001 3:23 PM
Comment on Victim Compensation Program


I am writing to comment on the Victim Compensation Program. I am a visiting professor at NYU and Connell Professor at UCLA Law School; I have taught torts for 32 years.

1. I believe the term "physically injured" should include the emotional distress of those evacuated from the damaged buildings, whether or not they suffered direct physical impact. As you know, the latter requirement has been eliminated by virtually every American jurisdiction. Nor do I think there should be a requirement of physical consequences (sleep loss, changes in diet); we know that emotional distress has physical components.

2. I believe that collateral sources should be disregarded. I gather the DOJ is already inclined to disregard charitable donations. The only other significant collateral sources are those for which the victim already has given value--premiums for insurance, labor for employment benefits (including insurance).

3. I do NOT believe survivors should be compensated for the pain and suffering of decedents. The only justification for such payments after death is deterrence, which has no relevance to the federal compensation fund.

4. Obviously statistical methods will be necessary to extrapolate forward the income streams of those killed or injured and the portions that would be devoted to the benefit of dependents.

5. State law varies greatly about whether family members can recover for damage to the relationship with a victim who is killed (wrongful death) or injured (loss of consortium). No state offers a principled basis for drawing the lines it does. I believe the DOJ is free to draw its own lines; I would urge it to do so broadly to include spouses, parents, and children (including step-relationships). At the same time, I do not believe there should be individualized valuations of these relationships; the purpose is to acknowledge the loss, not to compensate it, since there can be no meaningful compensation.



I would be glad to expand on or explain any of these ideas.



Individual Comment

2001-11-20