The American Museum of Tort Law opened in Winsted Connecticut on September 26, 2015. Remarkably, it is the first and only law museum of any kind in the United States. The Museum was conceived by Harvard Law School graduate Ralph Nader to educate, inform and inspire American citizens about tort law — the law of wrongful injuries — and trial by jury, an important right guaranteed in the 7th Amendment to the Constitution, in the Bill of Rights.
Most lay people (if our experience is anything to judge by) have no understanding of what tort law is, or why it is an important safeguard of our health, safety and welfare. Worse still, very few people seem to have either an understanding or an appreciation of that pillar of our democracy – trial by jury. But how do you distill something as complicated and text-heavy as case law and legal opinions into an interesting and engaging museum, while at the same time retaining accuracy and authenticity?
The answer was a partnership between legal scholars and design experts. Professor Joseph Page of the Georgetown University School of Law selected the leading tort cases: both those cases which have shaped the law, and other cases which have led to a safety society for all of us. Still, the challenge remained — how to translate these cases into visually appealing, engaging exhibits. The Museum relied upon the design skills of Eisterhold Associates to present the exhibits in a simply, visually interesting, accurate manner. Their design was ingenious. They recruited a variety of illustrators, including Pulitzer Prize-winning cartoonist Matt Wuerker, to create cartoons and illustrations to explain each of the cases selected. Then, Professor Page distilled the essential details of each case down to a single text block (some of the larger cases have more than one text block). Together, the combination of a relatively small amount of text, combined with clear, often humorous cartoons, helps the visitor understand the importance of each case that is presented. The exhibits are designed for adults and children from middle-school grades and older, i.e. 12 and older.
Here’s what visitors learn:
A frieze outlines, in broad overview, the history of tort law, from its roots in the English common law centuries ago, to its current shape. Significantly, visitors learn that just as tort law has adapted from medieval to modern times, so it will continue to evolve and keep pace with the torts of the future — if, for example, a drone falls from the sky and kills someone, or a driverless car is hacked and goes off the highway.
A gallery is devoted to precedent-setting cases. Among these are the first case which recognized the need for fault before there could be recovery of damages (Brown v. Kendall (1850)). This was the birth of the reasonable person standard for conduct.
Byrne v. Boadle (1863) adopted the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur. Sioux City & Pacific Railroad Co. v. Stout (1873) set forth the doctrine of attractive nuisance, and held that a landowner must take reasonable precautions to prevent injury to minor trespassers. This case serves to foster discussion about what is meant by “reasonable,” and how a jury might decide that issue. Other cases include the two products liability cases, MacPherson v. Buick Motor Co. (1916) and Greenman v. Yuba Power Products, Inc. (1963) which held manufacturers strictly liable for manufacturing and design defects, respectively. Visitors learn about Hoffman v. Jones, the 1973 decision from Florida which was the first to adopt the comparative negligence rule Another case is Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, the 1993 decision which articulated a new standard for the admissibility of expert testimony.
A movie highlights the importance that the Founding Fathers placed on the trial by jury. One of the complaints in the Declaration of Independence (after taxation without representation) was the claim that King George III had deprived Americans of the right to trial by jury. The right of trial by jury was important enough that it appears three times in the Constitution, including in the 7th Amendment, which creates the right to trial by jury in civil cases. The movie also demonstrates the broad public benefit of some tort cases, with footage relating to asbestos litigation, the Ford Pinto, and the McDonalds hot coffee case.
The Museum is not limited to precedents, however, but includes a number of cases showing how tort law and trial by jury protect rights of individuals against wrongdoers in such fundamental areas as health, safety, privacy, and more.
Interactive panels, for example let visitors learn about cases such as Donald v. United Klans of America (1987), in which the plaintiff was able to prove a conspiracy between two murderers and the United Klans of America, resulting in a $7 million verdict which put that organization out of business, and Kline v. 1500 Massachusetts Ave. Apartment Corp. (1970), which held that landlords have a duty to take steps to protect tenants from foreseeable criminal acts committed by third parties in common areas of landlord’s property.
There is a small gallery featuring dangerous and unsafe toys, which highlights the progress that has been made in improving safety for products aimed at children. Lawn darts, choking hazards, and bow and arrow sets are all on display – and the dangers of each are described.
Three important purposes of tort law are:
- To compensate those who have been wrongly injured;
- To disclose the acts of wrongdoing that caused or cause harm;
- To deter wrongdoing in the future.
Many of the exhibits at the American Museum of Tort Law reveal how powerful the second factor — disclosure — is for exposing wrongdoers and holding them accountable. This means more than just compensating the injured victim or victims (although that is important, too). It means that time after time, lawsuits filed against corporations have led to the discovery and disclosure of knowing, intentional conduct by the corporate defendants. In other words, people have been injured or killed not by mistake, but as a result of conscious, deliberate decisions. These cases include Grimshaw v. Ford Motor Co. (1981), which involved litigation about the defective design of the Ford Pinto. During the trial the plaintiff found documents showing that improving the safety of the car could have been made at minimal cost ($5.00 – $8.00 per vehicle), but that Ford executives decided not to make those improvements, based upon a calculus that paying damages of $200,000 per death would cost the company less. The jury returned a verdict of $125 million in punitive damages.
Another such case is Borel v. Fibreboard Paper Products Corporation (1971), the first asbestos case to result in a plaintiff’s verdict, based upon a theory of strict liability. The cases which followed led to the discovery that the manufacturers had known of the dangers of asbestos since the 1930s, but had concealed that knowledge from workers, and had attempted to suppress knowledge of the hazards.
Liebeck v. McDonalds is well-known, but often misunderstood (by our visitors at least) case. Liebeck suffered third degree burns that required skin grafting when she spilled a cup of McDonald’s coffee on her lap. During trial, the plaintiff discovered not only that McDonald’s was knowingly serving coffee at roughly 190 degrees, but that it had had roughly 700 prior complaints of burns due to the hot coffee. The temperature is important because (a) most of us will, at some time or another, spill something on ourselves; and (b) a liquid at that temperature will cause full-thickness skin burns in just three seconds. The jury verdict included punitive damages for $2.7 million, representing 2 days of McDonald’s coffee sales. Visitors who have only heard anecdotally about the case often think that it was “frivolous” until they learn the facts.
These cases and others in the Museum demonstrate that because of jury verdicts and the work of trial lawyers representing specific victims, the country as a whole is safer. Products have been improved, or removed from the market; civil rights have been protected and defended; and the environment is cleaner. Tort law and trial by jury today are more important than ever in protecting our citizens from corporate wrongdoing and governmental overreach.
In his remarks at the opening of the American Museum of Tort Law, Pulitzer Prize–winning historian Eric Foner stated that tort law is “the weapon of the weak.” This is a brilliant shorthand phrase that perfectly encapsulates the importance of both trial by jury, and tort law: They permit individuals — any of us — to hold the powerful accountable, to protect our health, our safety, our well-being, and in so doing, to make life better for all of us.
I encourage you to visit the American Museum of Tort Law.
The American Museum of Tort Law is located at 654 Main St., Winsted CT 06098. Open Daily (except Tuesdays), from 10:30 – 5:00. Tel. 860-3790-0505. Visit www.tortmuseum.org