1. An Introduction to American Courts Judge Tom C. Rawlings Judge, Juvenile Courts Middle Judicial Circuit Sandersville, GA USA tom@sandersville.net www.tomrawlings.com

2. Georgia’s Middle Judicial Circuit Five Counties in East Central Georgia Five Counties in East Central Georgia 2,300 square miles with 100,000 residents 2,300 square miles with 100,000 residents

3. Judicial Review: The Role of the Courts “The judiciary... ha[s] neither FORCE nor WILL but merely judgment." Alexander Hamilton, The Federalist No. 78. “The judiciary... ha[s] neither FORCE nor WILL but merely judgment." Alexander Hamilton, The Federalist No. 78. “It is emphatically the province and duty of the judicial department to say what the law is.” Marbury v. Madison 5 U.S. 137 (1803) “It is emphatically the province and duty of the judicial department to say what the law is.” Marbury v. Madison 5 U.S. 137 (1803)

4. State Court of Appeals Juvenile Court Superior Court Probate Court Misdemeanor Court Administrative Law Judge Magistrate Court State Supreme Court

5. United States Court Of Appeals State Supreme Court United States District Court United States Supreme Court

6. Sources of Law United States Constitution United States Constitution United States Treaties United States Treaties United States Statutes United States Statutes State Constitutions State Constitutions State Statutes State Statutes Common Law Principles Common Law Principles Have independent force but are also used to interpret the other sources of law.Have independent force but are also used to interpret the other sources of law.

7. Common Law Developed in England from custom and tradition in each community. Developed in England from custom and tradition in each community. Became a “System” only when Kings (and Courts) determined consistency was needed. Became a “System” only when Kings (and Courts) determined consistency was needed. In 19 th Century, most American states codified common law principles. In 19 th Century, most American states codified common law principles.

8. Case Example FACTS: Child ate rat poison and died. Parents sued manufacturer of rat poison. FACTS: Child ate rat poison and died. Parents sued manufacturer of rat poison. Argument: Company could have added ingredient that would have made child vomit. Argument: Company could have added ingredient that would have made child vomit. STATUTE: Makes a company liable for damages caused by a product that is not “merchantable” or “reasonably suited to the use intended.” STATUTE: Makes a company liable for damages caused by a product that is not “merchantable” or “reasonably suited to the use intended.”

9. Example: Banks v. ICI Americas Georgia Supreme Court, 1994 FACTS: Child ate rat poison and died. Parents sued manufacturer of rat poison. FACTS: Child ate rat poison and died. Parents sued manufacturer of rat poison. STATUTE: “The manufacturer of any personal property... shall be liable in tort [civilly responsible], irrespective of privity, to any natural person who may use, consume, or reasonably be affected by the property and who suffers injury to his person or property because the property when sold by the manufacturer was not merchantable and reasonably suited to the use intended, and its condition when sold is the proximate cause of the injury sustained.” OCGA § 51-1-11 STATUTE: “The manufacturer of any personal property... shall be liable in tort [civilly responsible], irrespective of privity, to any natural person who may use, consume, or reasonably be affected by the property and who suffers injury to his person or property because the property when sold by the manufacturer was not merchantable and reasonably suited to the use intended, and its condition when sold is the proximate cause of the injury sustained.” OCGA § 51-1-11 Argument: Company could have added ingredient that would have made child vomit. Argument: Company could have added ingredient that would have made child vomit.

10. Question Presented What does “merchantable and reasonably suited to the use intended” mean? What does “merchantable and reasonably suited to the use intended” mean? Romanian equivalent: vandabil in conditii de siguranta Romanian equivalent: vandabil in conditii de siguranta

11. Court’s Analysis Court relies on The Restatement of Torts, legal treatises, and Cases from other jurisdictions Court relies on The Restatement of Torts, legal treatises, and Cases from other jurisdictions Answer: In determining whether a product is “merchantable” and “reasonably suited” under the statute, the Court and jury can consider whether there were alternative designs available to the manufacturer at the time the product was manufactured. Court must balance risk against usefulness of product. Answer: In determining whether a product is “merchantable” and “reasonably suited” under the statute, the Court and jury can consider whether there were alternative designs available to the manufacturer at the time the product was manufactured. Court must balance risk against usefulness of product.

12. Result Court relies on common law ideas to “add clothes” to a “naked” statute. Court relies on common law ideas to “add clothes” to a “naked” statute. Through use of common law concepts, Court can expand or limit a statute’s meaning. Through use of common law concepts, Court can expand or limit a statute’s meaning. Other lower courts in Georgia must now follow this analysis when considering Product Liability cases Other lower courts in Georgia must now follow this analysis when considering Product Liability cases

13. Critical Issue Can Parties Review the Law and Know How to Conduct Their Activities to Avoid Criminal or Civil Liability? Can Parties Review the Law and Know How to Conduct Their Activities to Avoid Criminal or Civil Liability?

14. Stare Decisis: The Rule of Precedent Promotes the evenhanded, predictable, and consistent development of legal principles Promotes the evenhanded, predictable, and consistent development of legal principles Fosters reliance on judicial decisions Fosters reliance on judicial decisions Contributes to the actual and perceived integrity of the judicial process. Contributes to the actual and perceived integrity of the judicial process. Adhering to precedent "is usually the wise policy, because in most matters it is more important that the applicable rule of law be settled than it be settled right Adhering to precedent "is usually the wise policy, because in most matters it is more important that the applicable rule of law be settled than it be settled right PAYNE V. TENNESSEE, 501 US 808 (1991)PAYNE V. TENNESSEE, 501 US 808 (1991)