Suchergebnisse

Despite the Federal Tort Claims Act's explicit purpose to make state law determinative of recovery for governmental wrongs, the United States Supreme Court in Laird v. Nelms held that liability under the Act may not be predicated on a state statute imposing absolute or strict liability. Professor Peck challenges the Court's rationale in reaching this decision, concluding that Laird v. Nelms makes legislative revision of the Federal Tort Claims Act imperative. To guarantee that the Act will not insulate the government from strict liability for its ultrahazardous activities, Professor Peck proposes several basic changes to the Federal Tort Claims Act, the most vital of which are amendments to the Act's jurisdictional grant and discretionary function provisions.

The August issue of Administration & Society carried an article by M. Heper, C. L. Kim, and S. Par entitled " The Role of Bureaucracy and Regime Types: A Comparative Study of Turkish and South Korean Civil Servants." The present article criticizes these authors' interpretation of previous writings in comparative public administration and suggests reformations of the Heper-Kim-Pat hypotheses that will reconcile their data with earlier theoretical positions