Oh how things have changed. Remember the Palsgraf case from your first year torts class? It was the case where the railroad employee attempted to help a traveler who happened to be carrying dynamite; the traveler fell, and the dynamite exploded causing a scale to fall on poor Ms. Palsgraf. Ms. Palsgraf lost her lawsuit against the railroad for lack of foreseeability.

I have never cited Palsgraf in a brief, but its influence at least silently pervades any analysis of foreseeability. I did re-read Palsgraf when I was preparing this entry, thinking that I would quote a line or two. Every sentence, however, is quotable and lovely and I recommend that you click here and read the whole opinion.

The Wall Street Journal Law Blog reports that the Historical Society for the New York state courts recently re-argued Palsgraf and, this time, Ms. Palsgraf was successful, or at least got a chance for her case to be heard by a jury. What does that say about the evolution of our understanding of foreseeability and accountability?

On the lighter side, the WSJ reports that the re-argument was accompanied by a judicial duet of  "Unforeseeable"� to the tune of Nat King Cole's "Unforgettable." � Wish I had been there!

By the way, the Historical Society is interesting. The Society is a not-for-profit organization dedicated to the preservation of the extensive judicial heritage of courts in the Empire State. Take a look at its website -- check it out.