a new spin on an old favorite
In this interview from Steven Keeva’s Transforming Practices (see prior post here), the late professor Janeen Kerper of California Western School of Law remakes the tort class classic Palsgraf v. Long Island Railroad Company, 248 N.Y. 339, 162 N.E. 99 (1928). The facts remain the same: Helen Palsgraf is waiting on a train platform in East New York when another passenger, running for the train, drops a package containing fireworks. The fireworks explode, causing a scale on the platform to fall, injuring Mrs. Palsgraf. Instead of considering the case’s relevance to the laws of negligence, Kerper remarks: “When I first began teaching Palsgraf, I was struck by the fact that the appellate decision contains only the barest description of the facts. After reading the case, you do not know how old Mrs. Palsgraf was, what her hopes and dreams were, whether she had any family, nor even the precise nature of her injury. The factual record of the appellate decision is completely stripped of humanity.” According to Kerper, Palsgraff presents a unique opportunity for law students to go beyond the four corners of an appellate decision to the realm of lawyers as creative problem solvers. In that capacity, lawyers look to “the client's underlying needs, goals and objectives” in order to come up with “a broad array of possible solutions” to the legal problem before them. So, sitting down to an initial consultation, Kerper’s student-lawyers might ask Mrs. Palsgraf: “Why don't you tell me more about yourself? Where do you live? What do you do? What are your greatest concerns? How do you want your life to change? What kind of future do you want for yourself and your family?" A little humanity goes a long way towards meeting clients’ real needs.
